Second

Someone has been busy.

Ofpforum wrote a trick how to mod it in that link in my sig. It works fine with me. Haven't caused problems with campaign or missions. But those script's doesn't have built-in suppressive fire... Altough quite big deal of suppressive fire is generated because of the fact that they start to shoot worse and worse when they get shot at.

Just happened to release new version of it My sig now has the link to that thread...

Version 1.5 is now ready. First post edited with links and such. Short list of new things: -Most ugly bug in the whole wide world squashed/killed/exterminated -One less suppression level Panic (It was just dead weight) -All AIs finally can keep their individual skill-level, which gets adjusted (had energy enough to add couple of arrays for it) -Suppression levels were tweaked bit again.

New ERAs are monsters. Saw some figures about Black Eagle... "Kaktus" ERA is expected to add armor's resistance against HEAT by 2 times and against KE (sabot) 1.6 times. So T-80 with Kontakt-5 heavy ERA would have about 800mm RHA against KE in frontal turret... T-90 has 10% more armor so maybe it would make nearly 900mm RHA. T-72... it has about 400mm RHA by default (if i remeber right)... hmm it would make bit more than 600mm RHA. T-90's sabot rounds are weaker than M1A1's, as it's automatic loader prevents using optimal lenght (they are considered to be too short). ATGM-missile (AT-11 sniper was it?), is superfast, and penetration is maybe 600-700mm of RHA. Accuracy was mentioned to be very good to maximum distance, by russian sources... But Russian's ATGM techology hasn't proven me, but i would guess that unreliable missiles were just temporary problem in dusk of Soviet Union (not enough proper materials so they were replaced with not so proper materials?). But yeah... It might be better to keep T-90 equal to M1. Some adjustments to direction or other, but in grand scale they seems to be equal.

I am acquainted with someone who was hired as the "historical advisor" for the Russell Crowe "Gladiator" movie. She is a classics researcher and was increasingly frustrated that virtually none of her technical advice was ever heeded by the film-makers. She was so appalled by the end result that we saw (and cringed at) in cinema theatres that she wanted her name removed from the end titles (the film- makers put it in anyway). I wonder if it's the same situation with any of these "military advisors" for games. I can't imagine any military man with any integrity endorsing stuff like "Call of Duty", for example. Most likely this is the case. CoD2's mil advisor has been atleast part of PR-tours, taking journalists around Poland's coutryside as Nazis (Polish actors) first took them as POW's and Yanks (Polish actors these guys too) then rescued the journalists (whole trip was bit like disaster from what i've read)... Don't know anything else about his presense with that game... Well i haven't even played at the game You know what: I had to get up from bed, because i realised that this Forum is full of colonels... and i just mocked colonels (well joking but)... When i realised that my first tought was: Am i stupid or what! Sorry to you all colonels... I love you all

Call of tudy, medal of humor etc... ALL had military advisors. Colonel rank atleast in call of tudy... Wait colonel from *(censored)*! No wonder they were such a grap I can think what players would have said when they truely would have been part of big machine in CWC... "Yup. I saw one enemy, but missed it."

I would like to critize something. I don't know how many else feels like this, but here is comes nevertheless: I have nothing against ACE, but already with WGL it felt, quite hmm... lame to advertice it with superheavily used realism- and simulation-words (simulation is somewhat okay but realism...). It felt like: "Are you guys serious that war is videogame?". I left mod untouched after few playtime. It had/has potential, i give credit for that, but those too much used superlatives irritated me too much (couldn't see that WGL would have been so much more "realistic" than rest of the OFP mods, so it felt too cocky and arrogant)... Just to give you my opinion. Most likely you don't care and you have all the legiment to do so (it's your project, not mine). Well next week i set my foot to (or into ) marsh-soil for light infantry exercise, maybe i come back with bit less "old-and-angry-fart" attitude. Lack of sleep or food, beign wet (and smokes/matches are wet also ), bitten by mosquitos and having un-clean skin might make me appreciate comforts of computer wargames again. It has been too long... Will suppression/morale get implented at some phase? And what you mean with tactics? Is this for players or AI or maybe for both? And to end: Good luck with project.

Suma said that knowsabout shows only rough estimate, game and AI uses either more complex or precise values (don't remember which one of these). Maybe knowsabout is calculated only from some parts of AI's overall knowledge? But i don't know does NVGs have anykind effect for AI's spotting ability... Seems like that. But i'm havent tested it so my opinnion bases on gut-feeling.

PM me too.

I only looked that mission file (should already be sleeping), so might be that i'm missing something, but: isn't that a basic weakness of dostop from way back from OFP that they don't look at their direction of formation but the opposite way. They need dowatch or dotarget order. gamelogic suits best for dotarget in ArmA, they seems to have it's exact location unlike in OFP where gamelogic's exact location wasn't found by AI. And dotargetting gamelogic won't mess their targeting routines: it somehow stays in AI's memory but doesn't mess it's targeting routines. dostop should work just fine, if there is not commandmove of domove involved. Is that moving when dostop is given because of AI leader gives engage orders? Then the solution is 'this enableattack false'. Or does it affect that leader doesn't have dostop order (and it orders everyone to get back in formation)? I atleast issue dostop to everyone in squad and that seems to work okay.

Fair enough. Nice to hear someone elses experiences and training they had. Is it necessary to use laser rangefinder to fire that Carl Custav? Is the grenade guided or something so that it needs distance to the target? @LordNeuro*Serbia*: I have to agree that way your army managed to endure airstrikes and cheat high and costly techology was quite couraging news (this i say with respect) Okay. I've posted off-topic too much in here already. I shut my mouth now.

Because whole conflict was so short that basically troops didn't gain very much experience. It's sim you know ( ). You can't become veteran (term related to warfaring skills) without being in combat for relatively long time... No matter how well trained you are. That is stuff that i've read, seems that BIS did too.

Okay. Once again, as it seems to be so hard to understand. Was the situation following? -AI sees you (or maybe it's groupmate sees you). -You go behind cover -AI shoots you If it was, then AI just used its good calculation skills by determing your speed at point when visual contact was broken. This aint cheating as player will get samekind target square which's position bases on those same calculations. player can shoot thru wall as well. I have never seen that AI would shoot without having visual contact first (or getting that target square aka target order). Some vehicles might do so (i would quess it's because of their suppression capabilityes) They atleast are able to openfire at gamelogics (inside building) when infantry and some other vehicles aren't.

Have you looked at your profile-folders configs? Those distances aren't right, my AI skill is set to 1, and they seems to see very well, many times better than me. Once i was leaning behind corner and watched enemy squad at 250-300 meters... AT-guy spotted me in about 10 seconds. That was pleasuring supprise... Are you sure there wasn't something like sandbags or other objects near AI? It might be reason for it.

Sorry but my info is more perfect. That article you are referring to doesn't mention Sthora's weak points, which are those that i listed. It works with old middle of 80's missiles, but mordenized missiles are tougher... and also only way Sthora can used against those missiles is that MBT crew does have visual contact on missile's lauch. Sthora itself cant detect the missile which doesn't use (right type) laser! So, to keep it simple: Laser detector and crews eyes are only things that spot incoming missile and if missile doesn't need laser to hit it's target... Well, you can do the math. TOW, HOT, MILAN etc are in this group. And all of them are modernized so that IR-emitters don't have effect or atleast much. But: Laser detector and crews eyes are only things that spot incoming missile and if missile does use laser to hit it's target... Well, you can do the math again, but keep in mind that missile's laser can use different frequency than Sthora can notice. Also, they are not my ideas: 100% of my previous post bases on militarytech experts' analysis in public sources from late 90's and seems that anything hasn't changed in Sthora from that point of time or they are kept as military secret... i'm squadleader for ATGM-squad so i would be happy to know those secrets All-in-all: i'm not conserned about Sthora... Arena is another (much worse) case from my point of view, it can't be fooled with ways that i know of. @Törni: I don't know most easter missiles, but some MBT's missiles uses lasertunnel in which missile flies (that way it stays in it's flight path.)... I'm not sure is that spottable by Sthora... I would guess that yes. Older missiles (like the ones in BMP-2 and BRDM in SLA inventory) are wirequided and don't need laser to hit the target. But about more modern eastern missiles i can't say, i haven't much studied them.

But Sthora doesn't detect actual missile coming against it, only thing it spots is laserbeam with right frequency and most missiles such as TOW don't use laser which Sthore could notice! Missilecrew might use laser rangefinder to get distance to MBT (idiots if they do that!, as using laser rangefinder at that point (or aim it to MBT itself) is very stupid! So basically, in my opinion Sthora, should be left quite infunctionable against ATGMs which doesn't use laser activelly, as most doesn't atleast in form that Sthora would notice, maybe Hellfire uses laser which is "visible" to Sthora's laserdetector... i don't know. Tankcrew has to see that kind "invisible" missile itself to be able to activate and operate Sthora (not very likely, atleast so that turret manages to turn). And most modern ATGMs are modernized so that they use coded IR-impulses so that Sthora can't distract them very easily if at all. Sthora then again comes with powerful smokescreens (or are they fogscreens, not sure which is right term) that blocks IR- and visiblelight, so if missile goes to that smoke it looses its track to guiding unit (IR-beam gets blocked and doesn't meet with launcher) and becomes unguided missile, which most likely crashes ground. Fog is generated quite rapidly after it's lauch, 2 seconds if there not much wind... In wind fog i said to scatter quite lot. Ability to block laser beams with that fog is not very certain, this is atleast what i've read from militarytech magazines. Sthora activates itself from allkinds of lasers with right frequency (it has three activationsettings: Automatic, semi-.automatic and manual). It's also designed to be used against enemy MBTS, altough it's reaction time might be too slow in most cases. MBT uses laser rangefinder and shoots in second or two after that. Arena is another case, but not much reliable info is given about it (how reliable is it for real?). Test firing have proven that it's good piece of equipment, but now about warsituation? It's said that it increases MBT's combatsurvuval rate by 1.5, by russian sources.

link That should be what you look for.

Douple hazzle EDIT: i even managed to add one typo to that long text... How many typos is still left, i don 't even care.

That is caused by skill (plain this setskill x) being at 0... raising it to 0.1 and they aren't (so) braindead anymore. OFP had bit same effect. It generates very odd behaviour... I tested it too, i know EDIT: But this: ; _x setSkill [""aimingAccuracy"", 1]; _x setSkill [""aimingShake"", 1]; _x setSkill [""aimingSpeed"", 1] doesn't have anything to do with it, this far i've seen in my tests only setskill to have effect to anything.

Check both Kylkimiinat and pohjamiina at Defenceforces (mil.fi) equipments, engineer/explosives to be precise, but they are not just for engineers, but have big meaning on our AT- and guerilla-tactics over all

i didn't notice a word about demo in forums... Well, long time fan of combat missions so i don't need demo to prove myself that this is worth to buy.

Me is very stupid now Those mountains ofcourse... My viewdistance is at 2 km so i can't even think that behind that fog is still something.

It could be that k, as it should be _k... atleast Mr.Murray's script in my HD has it that way (but it might be old version). But does it give that kind error message? I usually just start scream or cry (don't we all?) and don't pay atenttion to it Is target's name right (second in array)? _X and _Y are it's x and y coordinates... Well that should be too right, as scirpt itself creates it with mapsingleclick-command ... It would be better if Mr Murray himself pays a visit... I feel myself jackass.

Interesting, all my previous tests showed that the default smoke grenades in ArmA does not block AI's LOS and is equally useless against AI as they where in OFP... Can you share the testmission you used? Did you use "smokeshell" createvehicle thing? I tried it with that earlier (with 1.08) and it didn't provide visual cover at all. i don't remember did i throw smokeshells too to test it, but conserning that createvehicle-command i'm sure. But i have gut feeling that smokeshells have saved my life sometimes. Wasn't it usual that blocking effect added with eventhandler in OFP mods. If my memory serves me right atleast FDF did it with eventhandler, so createvehicle didn't work if blocking object wasn't created aswell. Deady typed: Are you speaking of Fallen trees? Atleast fallen sprunces blocks sight, which is very good.