Silver Falcon

I would like to hve simulation of targeting computer in modern tanks such as M1 and so on. I mean - laser distance meter (to elevate canon due to balistic curve) and "tracking device" to get the angle speed of target to turn aiming point infront of moving vehicle after you track cross on the target for moment pushing the right button. So after you track the target and targeting comuter turns the canon, you should hit target on long distance just by having cross on target.... More precise and detail information may be found... Should be very useful (and relistic) in tankfights over 1Km. http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/abrams.htm Some M1 sim manual/tips: http://oldsite.simhq.com/simhq3....cs.html

I should be very good to make at least some of COC features in default interface (to be more comfortably operated). I like that.

Well it is easy to make quite well movement for CQB (MOUT) in OFPanim for OFP. I have base of it, it lets me to lean to sides and fire qite well in movement (only to close range up to 30-50m). I even have knife addon and proper move to use it and scripted enemy who can strike me by elbow (and stun me) if I try tu cut him from forward. What is worse, i dont have special keys for leaning and so on, so I had to sacrifice back-side movement for it. Whas should be great is something like cover - like in vietcong or at least a system that if you touch one key and arrow you can lean to the side of arrow or lower your stance a bit quickly by back arrow (still on knee for example but lover to be covered behind sanbag not needing to lie) and higher your stance a bit touching front arrow (to can fire from window and then go back quickly to kneel as you stop pushing arrow).

I guess its not such a problem since there are not many missions that are totaly unknown (for example - SWORDFISH 3, ET - there must have been SF1,2;ET1 - so a some people can guess quite well who is the author). If someone want to track it he have easily the info he want, even if the mission is absolutely new but keeps name or other special mark of serie etc. I think it simply can´t be helped, so its on people to vote their true mind, not a friend or so (guess they are to few to make someone win   ). I guess (and hope) that most of people who played SF2 or ET or some of Hawk´s will rather vote the best then just the one they played before (note that there is not so much new (and surprising) for them in remakes as for new players). Thanks for deleting identities, i think all authors are happy for that Â

At first: Very nice work, you must have been working realy tirelessly. Some suggestions: - you increased spacing in formations (good for open terrain), could you set one MOUT formation (column or so) which would have decreased spacing? - is it possile to edit formations so you can change not much used "V" formation to "round defensive formation" (im not sure in the word, just translating from my lang.)? or set one of your mates infront of commander (as a pointman/pathfinder; not in all formations, just column and stagged column)? -the explosions seems to me bit too orange as when I remember what I seen in documentary films - there is just a flash, smoke, and dust and then the tank starts to burn from inside (qite nice by BIS) i wonder if you made explosions FX as in documents or films or imagination (just curious, realy no offence) Its true, it looks realy striking especialy in NVG - NVG is truly nice done - that scene with BMP and incoming tank is perfect.

At first: Very nice work, you must have been working realy tirelessly. Some suggestions: - you increased spacing in formations (good for open terrain), could you set one MOUT formation (column or so) which would have decreased spacing? - is it possile to edit formations so you can change not much used "V" formation to "round defensive formation" (im not sure in the word, just translating from my lang.)? or set one of your mates infront of commander (as a pointman/pathfinder; not in all formations, just column and stagged column)? -the explosions seems to me bit too orange as when I remember what I seen in documentary films - there is just a flash, smoke, and dust and then the tank starts to burn from inside (qite nice by BIS) i wonder if you made explosions FX as in documents or films or imagination (just curious, realy no offence) Its true, it looks realy striking especialy in NVG - NVG is truly nice done - that scene with BMP and incoming tank is perfect.

Your points are qite true, however its not easy to get all informations of such "details". I quite spent a lot time searching for informations about Russian Naval Infantry and VDV in 1985 and their equipment and units, but I can´t realy say have enough information to be sure to give the campaign very high realism. It quite realistic for people that are concerned with military units and so on, but some russians concerned with especialy those units may laugh. It would not be a bad idea to create a topic with links to sites containing information about various things to improve level of realism in missions. Of course, people should post only information from very sure sources, not post their toughts what is realistic as peaople vary in the level of knowledge or personal experience. Also, those points you wrote seems to me just like details, which gives the feeling only to realistic concepted mission. It needs good knowledge of Russian and NATO doctrines and it is not easy to learn in week, because officers of both sides studied it a few years. So the point is as I wrote to create a topic with chosen information providing relatively fast brief to such stuff.

Realism is quite a relative term. For example: would you call a film Band of Brothers relistic? It is based on true history, but I thing there are many not much realistic scenes or details. I´m mission designer and to be frank I rather vary it. Once I make rather realistic mission next I make some less realistic one (however I try to let it be at least logical and realistic in other ways than the theme - for example some infiltration features that OFP lacks). Some players like realistic ones, some not... This time I replaced leader of OP85 project which tries to come with realistic campaign for specnaz however there are not many sources of specnaz doctrines so again it is a bit relative term. At least from the time I design the themes of new missions I give more attention to reconnaisence and logical partysan defensive doctrines in mountain terrain. Those TDG should be done as MP ones, since OFP have some quite different rules due to AI. AI may be the OPFOR, but I´d rather not send AI MG to cover me from building, its also hard to let half of your squad throw granades at right disperse on enemy at right time and use leapfrog withdraw under covering fire.

In Everon Transport I haven´t this kind of problem, maybe replay will help. Not using savegame seems to me like some kind of bad joke in the end... *SPOILER WARNING* You get shot down by script and you have to get from area around Durras (south) to Lamentine (east) trough enemy territory. There are not many guarding units, so running trough forrests would secure you enough... well if you try to assault some base to get vehicle - there are quite good scripted and nasty reinforcements. But the run is very, very long (and you can use only 2x speed). Since I got to demilitarised zone, i headed directly to Lamentine, put weight to shift (running) and went to get something to drink. As I got some water I heard a bang. So I returned to PC an saw some kind of minefield. At second time I was cautious about running to minefield again, but suddenly I heard a bang - some BMP suddenly appeared just behind me (in US territory), shot me and then as the camera turned to it it exploded. I believe it was sctripted, because I didn´t hear any typical BMP noise (you hear it houndreds meters when its moving). Than I told to me I spent too much time just running from forrest to forrest. That marathon is enough just playnig it once. I wonder If someone finished it and so can tell me if ariving to Lamentine is all or if I did something wrong. I even tried to shorten the way trying to get as far as I can in chopper, but its scripted to kill you.

I guess I played all modes and haven't encounter such problem (at medium difficulty). I realised that times by times there are some of them that can take more dammage, but can be beaten. The "devil pingu mod" is truly lol

I guess some scores, credits and so on will be released just after the public vote. BIS rather want all of us to vote just our mind and not to influence the voting process by publishing the scores by judges or identifing the finalists (persons I mean). Edit: Ouch I am  sorry gwg viper Â

However I´d rather download one of the packs such: http://www.tacticalblunder.com/files/missions/mec_finalists_addons.zip http://www.ofpec.com/addons/addon_detail.php?ID=474 So you can be sure its on major sites which shouldn´t have problems with bandwith and so on. Thanks to those guys who made the packs an mirrors.

I think it cant stop this kind of problems, but at least minimize it a bit. Its a real problem of public votes, so this prize will be minor I guess (to the main prize). I hope such problems will be at least minor Let the best win. I´m looking forward for your reviews. BTW some missions are long and rather hard. Now i guess I know why the judging took so much time Â

Thanks, really nice xmas.

Well, i used to play with this too. But for clarity sake, you mean AIMPRECISION (i guess). Unfortunately, i dont know how to decrease wounded aimprecision modificator too. I guess that aimprecision can be defined for every motion (to reduce dispersion for example for run).

I guess, no mission will have full score in all categories such as reality/ cinematics/ scripts...(there is nothing other to compare, so the relative avarge of rating is free for needs of judges). And I guess that judges will compare the imaginary maximal potential of each category, however I think that SP missions with addons have the best chance for VBS because of ballanced potential in every testing category (especialy cutscenes and story for SP and greater potential of addons), however the potential may not be fully used and unaddoned mission have a small + against badly or avargely addoned missions. But that is only a guess, i write what i think, because Placebo won´t answer sooner than monday and I guess he will be pretty busy that time  By the way: Why not to make VBS prize for every category? I think it can´t be too expensive for BIS since have copyright on it and those common player would hardly buy full VBS pack - it must cost only the expenses for material, posting and so on for BIS (maybe Im wrong)... and its true that comparing 6 categories to get one winner is not ideal In other hand, let be happy for that one VBS, its nice deal

By the way, would BIS publish the results of each round? Or the scores of missions which didnt make it to another round... ? One more thing, in interview you said, that you check the incoming mission continualy and return the rules-violating for fix. Will you work on that during weekend?

Thanks Addons list: A I said, silenced Socom is in HK pack (its not hard to find a link. Perhaps, nowdays there are more, just SEARCH. Functional termal goggles can´t be done in OFP1 engine. I never heard about Snake addon, just find some addonmaker you know and ask him to make it or try to make your own (its not a joke if you´re patient enough to learn and at least bit talented).

However, there are differences in quality of moves, it´s good job. For example the sprint, most of static ones are cool, but in some moves, the backpacks of partyzans are deformated (and jumping updown). Some moves have similar problems as original ones (i bet most are remade official, not done whole new). For example, when the pelvis is rotated bit to side in forward move (usualy you have pelvis straight, because you can move faster and more fluently). It is fact that when pelvis is straight and chest rotated, it deforms the body a bit, but its about priorities. In sniper motion, i would turn the chest bit back (antimoved by pelvis) to balance the weight of long riffle better. I hope, this is constuktice criticism, I realy know, how hard work this is. BTW: Another ambitious anim system - will be combined with scripting features in mod, and then launched for general use to let combine its basics with any another mod. http://ofp.gamezone.cz/index.php?showthis=6858

www.munchstudios.wz.cz, but we haven´t updated since Hawk In Nets release. mail: munchstudios@centrum.cz 4 Bsoldier: We made MGS and commandos inspired mission Hawk In Shadows (2002, for ofp 1.46) and prequel Hawk In Nets(2003). It contain many useful scripts for this type of game called "alarm system" and some with cameras and so on. I suggest you to take a look to our sites and download it (or wait for new version after BIS mission competition), if you have not your own well working system. We can help a bit when not actualy busy (as now), because there are not many stuff like that. Now, we use updated HK pack Socom (new optics), we ´ll can share (later) if you ´re interested...

What should be taken from Ravenshield is the behaviour of soldiers in urban area (can be special waypoint such as "search and destroy (urban)") using tight column formation. I like how the buddies covers your sides and the last one turns back on every stop. Also, the soldiers should take a look after any corner they miss and so on...

What should be taken from Ravenshield is the behaviour of soldiers in urban area (can be special waypoint such as "search and destroy (urban)") using tight column formation. I like how the buddies covers your sides and the last one turns back on every stop. Also, the soldiers should take a look after any corner they miss and so on...

Yeah, I guess its not easy to make rules perfect for anyone. I just hope, judges would take this rule bit easy, unless they feel they cannot judge it objectively. You know ... someone can take this pretty seriously and throw out all missions he ever played something similar Will the judeges be informed to make older published mission out of game or they will judge it as it is allready written in rules (in official rules version)? That is the last question. Thanks for the patience reading all the long posts, I know it must have take some time Perhaps I wrote it as if you´re the one who makes the rules

Well, i didn´t want to go to details, but for example, changing half of motions (anims, moves - realy hardwork!) - not only for cutscenes but even for gameplay, improving configs, retexturing units to be better looking in their enviroment (security instead of soldiers), adding one more event to one of ways where the mission is branching... By the way ... does it improve the meaning of judges/ the one judging the quantity of improvements (by the way will it be the one who first finds out that he played something similar before?, or by will he find for another judges who played it?, will he find original version to compare...?), that many of addons are done, reworked or updated by creators theirself just exactly for mission needs? When the mission is theoreticly infiltration and you base it on same area, and you have the older mission after year of development setting the guards paths to make the way of infiltration as long as possible in such a small area, it is nearly impossible to change it in radical meaning unless it is simply worse and you need one more month just for betatesting, if there are no gapes in security... So, some features are very hard to change, the same about most of cinematics, because the music is wrote just on their rythm, lenght and atmosphere, sometimes at halfs of seconds, so main changes will be about the motions and minor changes in camera. Of course, there will be some minor improvements, such as more massive use of unconventional (for common editing) features, minor changes in tracks of guards, but the base must be simply same. By the way, thera are so many dialogs, that dabing will be at least 10MB (in low quality, which is twice more, than limit for whole mission). There probably will be such a dabbed version, but after the competition if we get enough talented english voice actors (lets say most of dabing in unofficial OFP preojects is just funny, only 10% - 15% improves atmosphere). But that is not the main, just to make you sure we doesn´t catch Zzzs this time, but don´t expect I will write about any details. In my opinion, the main issue is if you can just improve / add new features (enough that is obvious, there was hard work behind and it is slightly improved version with much of addition (not much to story and concepts, but in technical way), not only same mission with one or two new addons), or you must realy change some (more than minor) parts of older concept aside of additions. The main issue about anonimity may be a name too. For example, if old mission is called Wilcats Revenge and main character have nick Wildcat - you must rename to: option1: Wildcats Payback option2: rename character to Ghostdog and mission to Ghostdogs Revenge option3: Ghostdogs Payback and change the picture of wild cat on picture used in original to picture of a dog option 4 rename all characters and name of fictional secret force the ghostdog works in... option5: Wilcats Revenge Millenium Remake ( ) (names are fictional and will have nothing to do with these in my/ ours mission) You know - some percentage is nothing clear or objective. If you answer exactly to the last paragraf questions, it should be more clear. I am sorry for asking nearly the same questions, but i think there was a little bit of misunderstanding or unclear questions on my side, I am sorry one more. By the way, there are cutscenes at every step (not only after every objective), at least 5mins intro, long outro, in the most quality we can ... half of year of work on cinematics is half of year of work..., exactly made concept and level design - even the island was done exactly to met all the requirements - its heavily tied together. I am worried that radical changs in concept will seem artificial, not tied to rest. It is very compact in design and so on... I am not scared of how judges will judge the quality of every part of mission... i just need to know who will say if it is redone enought FOR THE ANONIMITY RULE SAKE You know, for one year developed missions, most of improvements in time of 2 months can be easily called minor (well, for example the motions are not just eye candy, but adding more features in gameplay a.s.o., but word minor is not exactly defined) even if it is obvious that authors had full hands of work. I know, some of questions are not easy to say, at least in short time without asking others, but any actions to find it out are very welcome. If some cant be answered, we will just take the lottery, but any suggestions to changes that improves our chances not touching the basics of concept are welcome too. EDIT : I would be very happy if judges do it in some kind of way: Well, I just played excelent mission (hypotheticly), but well i played something very very similar some time ago. There is much addition, but well, the original must took much more work and i don´t feel it is fair if someone just used someone others originals and only improved it to win the competition. So if the remake is done by authors of original, whole mission will get 47 points. But if it was someone parasiting on others work and done just the improvements, he cant be judged for parts he didn´t do, so he will lose some points for the parts he didn´t do at his own let say he gets 32 points. Than the judge pass his points and requirement to check authors originality to someone independent of judging the mission to look into the readme to ensure who did the remake and choose one of options (point sets) from the judge. I think it is pretty fair because it take off the adventage of the ones who planed to publish their longly developed mission just after the news about competition and than changed mind and improve it bit more to improve it bit more and having long time of development adventage to those who just published it and it sill follows the anonimity requirements of competition. Can this be suggested to competition overseers? Will it help anything if there is suggestion at end of overview that it is based on published mission so we cant say for anonimity sake if we re the authoers of original or not and suggesting the way above and crediting only 3rd party content and dividing credits for original part and remake (as for example Island: Originals Author designer, Motions: Remake designer - see in readme who is author of original an who is author of ramake? By the way, I think this problem should be published wider - for example in Q&A, i was just lucky to take a look here. So I think, many people have no idea about this thread, especialy this explanation of rule.

Ad 1) Sorry, i found only one I quoted and I think it is not clear. To make it clear i must know, what exactly must be changed aside of some of addons, events, music... (name of mission?, name of characters?, picture logo of mission?, ...can anything be exactly same as original like way of guards, some of cutscenes...?). But to improve my argumants about remakes... year ago I ´ve read review on my old mission done in 2002, and the reviewer wrote, that he also found remake in english with same objectives location and events (original was made in czech only, Krasnaja Zvezda (Red Star in russian), one of winners of czech mission competition on ofp.info.cz (now ofp.gamezone.cz)). Also some team is working remake of official campaign of Resistance with new addons and bit more cutscenes, so I guess, that similarity with already published mission is not objective way of identification of authors. I think that those who work tirelessly on enhancing older mission these 2 months should have the right to participate when folowing a few basic, clear rules about name a.s.o. ,see above) Ad 2): Thanks, that is clear, I am satisfied. This was also becouse of potential renaming of the characters and mission name a.s.o. (due to anonimity rules)... original preqel of other mission, so these changes would distrupt the continuity, so that is the main reason for public