Jezza_NL

Hi there, After a long hiatus I am now getting back into ARMA. Unfortunately, I have trouble running Operation Arrowhead. I'll try to be as specific as possible about my problem, but please bear in mind that I'm really not a computer whizz. -I installed ARMA II on my PC from a DVD I bought back in 2010. I turned it on, played a mission, it ran beautifully - even on highest specs. -I then went on to download Operation Arrowhead via Steam. I installed it, turned the game on, and now I get error messages such as "bin\config/cfgvehicles/c130j/mfdairplanehud.bones". It's still possible to for example go into the editor and try a game, but the graphics are terrible, very low quality when in-game. There also are continual error messages similar to the one above. When I now try to run ARMA II only, I am still stuck with the error messages and deplorable graphics. -I've done the trick where you take the addons folder from ARMA II and drop it in the OA folder in Steam, but this did nothing. - I've had a look around the forum for solutions. I now run Steam as an administrator, which seemed to help some with similar issues. It has however done nothing to fix my problem. My current game version is 1.62.952.48 I have a NVIDIA GeForce GTX560 - but as said before, my pc ran ARMA II alone very well. Reading through the forum I see alot of issues with ARMA II and running OA from Steam, but I'm having trouble understanding the solutions and at any rate non seem to apply specifically to my problems. It would be fantastic if someone could point me in the right direction. Also, many of the issues seem related to DayZ - at the moment I am not interested in installing this or playing this mod. I simply want ARMA II, OA, and the CWR mod to work. Thanks so much for your help.

Thanks for this mod! I love it. The firefights sound so much more realistic now... And the tracers are great too. Thanks for making the mod!

Good going with the HK416, Jackal! Looking forward to seeing a selection of those in-game! Keep up the good work.

The stated aims of the SCO is really just to counter American influence in South East Asia. Fair enough! Although at the moment largely symbolical, especially the proposed membership of Iran is really just meant to piss off America. It is also a reaction the proposed new US-missile shield, which goes to show how that silly shield will only further agrevate those it is meant to protect the US against.

Looking very good mate! Looking forward to seeing a Dutch Bushmaster in-game. If you need any more reference materials, give a shout, I'm sure there will be loads of Dutch fans who will be more then willing to link through and provide images. There are plenty on the net now.

Weird how they didnt take dual-core processors into account. At least on the latest generation of laptops this is becoming a fairly common feature.

As far as I'm concerned, the game is not worth the full-price I paid. However, I'm most willing to be compensated for through two things: -The Flashpoint elite initiative, bringing the original CWC and RES campaigns including units into ArmA. These should be available for download completely free of charge. -I'm expecting more patches that will take care of bugs and improve game-performance issues.

Any progress yet? I was thinking it may be a good idea to give many of the soldiers Shemagh's as standard headgear - worn in different ways. A shemagh is a logical choice of headgear in a place as sunny as Saharani.

I dont like it when weapons are balanced just for fairness sake. It's not like that in real life either! Besides, I reckon that the AK74 the North Saharni's carry is alot better weapon then the M4. Packs a bigger punch.

I hate the map-view loading time as well. It makes me almost hesitant, or even afraid to use the map, especially under fire. Unlike in real life, most Arma/OFP gamers won't spend a day or so preparing for a mission, including commiting to memory the major landmarks of their AO. We have to look on our maps a little more frequently then in real life. This goes especially for pilots, who do not have the navigational aids like GPS with waypoints on a screen right in front of them they would have in real life. I hope in the near future this little problem will be fixed. For infantry it may be more realistic, but for pilots its a real issue.

Hey Sickboy, Just wanted to thank you for the effort. I've successfully modified my German ArmA with your patch, and I'm impressed by the extend of the translations, everything is translated. Thanks, and keep up the good work!

Yeah, but the Belgians are pretty much selling off their whole army, including the thousands of FNC's they have. Or what do you think of old FN Fal/SLR's from the Netherlands or Britain? The M240 that the RACS have is the exact version that the US uses, hence its called the M240. Diemaco's would be a good choice for Special Forces. Canadian produced, they are essentially modified (improved) versions of the M16A2 and M4A1, Diemaco's are used by alot of European SF as they have a good value for money ratio.

Amen, Igor. That's what just what I did and how I feel.

Yeh I agree, there are no cutscenes at all! Just some very, very short clips. With the Resistance campaign, the first couple of missions are only cutscenes or you traveling around, it was all about setting the scene. Now your dropped into the deep end right away, there is no psychological buildup or anything. So dissapointing.

More casual, whats the point in that? I think they should remain a proper organised military. I say change the equipment a bit though. I reckon BIS only used the M16 for the Saharani's as it was already easily available, not because it was the most realistic option. The M240 is certainly not the most realistic option, it would be realistic if they used the slightly simpler and original FN MAG machinegun. My proposal for Saharani weaponary would be -FNC rifles / Galil 5.56 -FN MAG machine gun -Add the Carl Gustav AT launcher I like how their SF have the G36, and excellent weapon. But on the other hand, is it realistic that the Saharani's have a much better weapon then their US counterpart? The G36 is a much better engineered and more expensive weapon then the M4, with much better capabilities.

I completely concur! The new campaign is a big back of ****. I find it highly disapointing. The characters remain flat and are not developed, completely unlike the characters from CWC, and especially Resistance's Troska. Worse off, the missions are extremely unrealistic. The idea that u have to charge at 4 armoured units guarded by infantry using a reloadable AT4 and a satchel is ridiculous. The campaign was obviously rushed, just made as something to add to the game so that it can be sold as a full game(and charge the full price accordingly), and not just an engine with some ready made units. I supose with ArmA were really just given the means, but the community has to make the ends itself. Not that I want to be totally negative. I love the new ArmA, the engine has many fixes that I wanted OFP to be improved on. I think in about a years time this game will really start to reach its potential, with new patches and lots of new addons and mods!

[im]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/SandVoss/ar_src_05.jpg[/img]>100kb Sniper demonstrating the total futility of ACU Camo, which fits into no environment but a dusty city. [im]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/SandVoss/ar_src_07.jpg[/img]>100kb Wallpapers: WALLPAPER 1 WALLPAPER 2

Couple of shots of a mission I'm working on.

First of all, ArmA/OFP are infantry-simulators, to simulate infantry-fighting. Anything else such as aircraft serve only a secondary purpose in the game. Second of all, I doubt the engine support many of the sophisticated features you named such as motion-tracking, or especially IR/Heat seeking. Third, do you really think it would actually be worth investing all this time in developing a system with multiple helicopters where one assigns the other one targets? This whole system requires trained operators, AI could never do this. To simulate a squadron of Apaches in the tank-hunting situation you sketched would require at least 8 trained and experienced players! In Flashpoint it was difficult enough to find good pilots who could fly a human infantry squad into and out of trouble using a transport helicopter. It took my squad quite some time to train upto a decent level in competency in Dutch style Air-Mobile operations. The pilot needs to be quite aware of his helicopter and its flying characteristics. Imagine tank hunting with a big and heavy Apache... On the other hand... Seeing IR and motion tracking capabilities in vehicles in ArmA would be awsome! What does always suprise me is that the Apache and the Hind are always viewed as each others equivalents. They are not! The Apache does not have the ability to carry a squad of upto 8 troops, and does not have the same level of protection. Only the firepower is roughly comparable. I'm not really into aircraft, but i reckon there is a better East-block equivalent of the Apache.

First of all, ArmA/OFP are infantry-simulators, to simulate infantry-fighting. Anything else such as aircraft serve only a secondary purpose in the game. Second of all, I doubt the engine support many of the sophisticated features you named such as motion-tracking, or especially IR/Heat seeking. Third, do you really think it would actually be worth investing all this time in developing a system with multiple helicopters where one assigns the other one targets? This whole system requires trained operators, AI could never do this. To simulate a squadron of Apaches in the tank-hunting situation you sketched would require at least 8 trained and experienced players! In Flashpoint it was difficult enough to find good pilots who could fly a human infantry squad into and out of trouble using a transport helicopter. It took my squad quite some time to train upto a decent level in competency in Dutch style Air-Mobile operations. The pilot needs to be quite aware of his helicopter and its flying characteristics. Imagine tank hunting with a big and heavy Apache... On the other hand... Seeing IR and motion tracking capabilities in vehicles in ArmA would be awsome! What does always suprise me is that the Apache and the Hind are always viewed as each others equivalents. They are not! The Apache does not have the ability to carry a squad of upto 8 troops, and does not have the same level of protection. Only the firepower is roughly comparable. I'm not really into aircraft, but i reckon there is a better East-block equivalent of the Apache.

I could not agree more. I hate the mission in the campaign where they send you out to kill 4 armoured units with an AT4 launcher with three rounds and a satchel charge. It could just not be more unrealistic. The AT4 is used primarily as a self-defense weapon. Generally, shoulder-carried AT weapons are not 'tank-hunting' weapons at all! They only serve as a defensive tool for infantry, but not something you would happily go hunting with! In real life aircraft, tanks, or heavy vehicle based-AT weapons such as TOW's on vehicles would be used for tank hunting. I think this demonstrates the poor quality of the campaign. I'm happy with the game, but i stopped playing the campaign as the missions are horribly unrealistic.

I hate that mission, so much... It is extremely unrealistic. As tho you would ever do such a thing alone! In real life you would send in a Forward Observer, who in turn would call in a jet to simply drop a bomb on these units.

If you play with a proffesional group of players, then TK incidents will be as rare, or perhaps even rarer then as they are in real life. I'm a member of the RCIR, an OFP squad which will in due time move its operations to ArmA. We occasionaly experience blue-on-blue incidents. We're a proffesional group of players with lots of experience and training, but shit happens, in real life its called 'the fog of war'. When TK happens, the person who did it just apolagises to the person who was hit, and that's it, mistake is forgiven. What I'm saying is, on public servers dont expect the best behaviour. Your best off joining a squad.

I'd say that overall ArmA is a good game. Not because of what it is at the moment, but because of the HUGE potential for modders. The engine features many improvements and things the community wanted, such as multiple gunner pos. per vehicle, or swimming, and a more dynamic environment. What has actually disapointed me the most is the campaign. It is total and utter crap. Its all rambo-style missions, such as going into impossibly hostile terrain in clear daylight, and snipe an enemy officer, and then having to get back to the starting point. Or having to go in ALONE to destroy 4 armoured units at an enemy camp, with only a reloadable AT4 (not realistic! and a satchel to destroy these units. Or what do you think of 4 SF units being send in in broad daylight to neutralize a town full of hostiles! Ridiculous. The game as is is not that impressive. But it sure has alot of potential.