Jump to content

Tarnish

Member
  • Content Count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Everything posted by Tarnish

  1. Hmmm, the chap with the L85A2 in that picture may want to have a rethink on his shooting technique, nice way to remove his teeth with the cocking handle and receiving a hot empty case in the face firing it left handed! :)
  2. Tarnish

    Rejenorst's Missions [SP/MP/COOP]

    @Rejenorst You're quite right regarding the US Army cancelling the Mk16 in favour of the Mk17. The stated reason is that the Mk16 gives no real improvement over the current in service 5.56mm weapons. Looking forward future missions from you, I'm replaying this one quite a lot.
  3. Tarnish

    Rejenorst's Missions [SP/MP/COOP]

    Short or not this is one of the best single player missions I've played in a while. The voice acting is very high quality, really adds to an already great atmosphere. Challenging but without being obscenely difficult. A big thumbs up to this one.
  4. Excellent work all round fellas, I've played through a few missions and it's been very enjoyable. A couple of minor observations so far. First the speed of the M1 Garand needs to be increased to be more like the Carbine, the M1 will fire as fast as you can squeeze the trigger. Also the anim for the Sten guns gripping the magazine, Nooooo!!! With the Sten's single column magazine that would cause a stoppage so it was a no no. The barrel shroud was the place to be. I'm an allied WW2 re-enactor as my main hobby so I've fired most of the allied personal weapons at one time or another so I'm reasonable familiar with them. Other than that and the Omaha CTD which I have after a team switch it's all pretty mega.
  5. Looking spot on, much more like the real weapon. Regards the RoF if realism is your thing and the game engine gives issues keep in mind that the M134 in its latest form the DC battery powered M134D produced by Dillon Aero has a fixed nominal rate of fire of 3000RPM. Seems no point pushing up towards 4000rpm if it will give problems. I should be getting my eyes on the M134D for real sometime before Xmas, only got some "old fashioned" AC guns at work at the moment.
  6. These units are the mutts nuts and placeholder or not I love the L129A1.
  7. Really enjoying this Alpha release so far, really bodes well for the full release, lots of atmosphere. I've been getting a few glitches, I found it impossible to keep the engine off on the M113 if I have a gunner in position. I've had a couple of "Out of Memory" CTDs and units quite regularly cease to respond to orders, they'll answer in the affirmative but simply not do anything. I've also found it annoyingly easy to lose use of my helo support by accidentally hitting the "OUT" command, if that was made a little more difficult to do that'd offset for my ineptitude! Keep up the good work.
  8. Really? So you're saying that you would be quite happy to have worked hard on a project for months to then see it stolen from you? I doubt that very much.
  9. I'm having great trouble trying to work out what Loosebruce's motivation was to behave in such a selfish and absurd way. Did he honestly think anybody would thank him for doing this? All he has achieved is to make an utter fool and pariah of himself. One has to ask if he behaves in such a manner in real life with absolutely no morals or consideration for other people? He's going to be a very lonely individual if that's the case. To the PR team, best of luck getting this frustrating and unnecessary situation corrected and I look forward with great anticipation to your mods official release.
  10. Tarnish

    dePBO not working on 1.54 content

    Calm thy self, I was making NO comment on your feelings about it simply stating my view as to why I like to have the ability to DePBO. And no I didn't read the whole thread as it all seems rather premature only one day after release of the DLC.
  11. Tarnish

    dePBO not working on 1.54 content

    It is a bit of a shame that the BAF content can't be DePBO'ed but it is BIS intellectual property after all so I can't complain. My only reason for wanting to unpack PBOs is to have the ability to take exisiting missions and plonk 3rd party units in the try them out in a proper single player mission enviroment. I loved "Battlesfields" in OFP Resistance for that very reason. It would be nice to have the PUKF weapons and kit in the BAF missions and campaign. C'est la vie.
  12. Yeah I'll happily concede that one mate, it's big, black, heavy and often a tw@t to fit if it's feeling like it! The pod itself can still fire standard US 2.75" rockets, although would be very unlikely as I think it's likely that aircraft system software was modified to account for the differing ballistics. :)
  13. UK Apache carries M261 launchers just the same as the US Army aircraft, it is just the rockets that are different. Trust me I'm an armourer and have humped the things on and off a few times. :)
  14. Ok I'm a self confessed rivet/stitch counter especially when it comes to UK military kit so I do admit to having some misgivings regards certain aspects of the unit and weapon models as portrayed in the BAF DLC. That as it may be I am still going to buy it as along with the improvements OA has already introduced those offered in the DLC can only add to it further, especially when as already pointed out I can mix and match BIS models with 3rd party stuff. I reckon the BIS British kit mixed with UKPF, RKSL and StalkerGB offerings will create quite a pleasing cocktail. As for paying for the DLC? Well I paid money for the Red Hammer and Resistance updates for Op Flash and they would be delivered as DLC rfather than on CD these days I'm sure. Royal Marines from 40 Commando on patrol in the Sangin area of Afghanistan are pictured (left) with the newly introduced L129A1 Sharpshooter 7.62mm rifle and (right) an L85A2 assault rifle. Both Marines are wearing newly issued Mk7 helmets and Mk8 Osprey body armour and are dressed in Multi Terrain Pattern (MTP) camouflage. http://www.defenceimagedatabase.mod.uk/fotoweb/Grid.fwx
  15. Tarnish

    Dragon Rising has been released

    I'll quite happily try the demo, I don't have to part with cash for that! But as you indicate there I also wonder if the demo is going to be delayed somewhat. There ain't now way no how that I'll be buying DR now either on PC or PS3 I have got the PS3 DR on my Lovefilm rental list and as I've just posted a Family Guy disc back I should have it here in the next couple of days as long as the pending Royal Mail strike doesn't cock things up.
  16. I first played the OFP demo when it was released in 2001 getting it off the PC Zone cover disc. I've still got OFP installed along with a ton of mods and addons, the same for Armed Assault and ArmAII.
  17. Tarnish

    Dragon Rising has been released

    :D Priceless!
  18. One of my favourite muck arounds with the OFP and ArmA 1 editors was to dePBO an existing mission into the editor to then play around with different units within a full mission. The best missions I found to be "Battlefields" in OFP and "Beaten Dog" in ArmA 1. However the mission PBOs in ArmA 2 seem to be hidden thus preventing from having a play around with them. Does anyone know how or indeed if they can be accessed or has BIS prevented access to them on purpose? I've tried all the tricks I can think of to find them but to no avail.
  19. Thanks for the reply. Don't know why I had a brain fart when looking for that! :)
  20. As with Operation Flashpoint/Resistance and ArmA before it I made sure I had ArmA 2 in my possession as soon as was possible. On the whole I'm very impressed indeed, the optimisation of the engine means that I can have ArmA 2 running at much higher graphical settings that I can with ArmA and especially OFP. Even though my present PC is many times more powerful than the PC I had in June 2001 when OFP was released there's still no way I can run OFP at max chat! So great work there BIS. Also the feel of the landscape is much more organic and believeable than it ever was before, all round despite the usual bugs one expects with a new BIS release the game feels on the whole right to me. However as my title indicates there is still one thing that really does rankle me here in 2009; namely the lack of vehicle damage models of a reasonable fidelity. With the rest of the game striving for and arguably achieving many of its aims in regards to realism I find it lamentable that the same damage point system that was present in OFP eight years ago is still featured in ArmA 2. Now I'm not expecting a high resolution model as found say in Battleground Europe (World War 2 Online) but something that at least recognises that the frontal armour of a main battle tank cannot be worn down by repeated hits from small arms projectiles or even multiple hits from a HEAT warhead of insufficent power the penetrate that particular level of armour protection. All I'm hoping is come the release of ArmA 3 BIS will hopefully have seen fit to include more realistic damage models for the vehicles and aircraft.
  21. Tarnish

    Proper damage models?

    Oh yes it "does the job" as you say but a hit points based system still doesn't allow for the fact that if a certain projectile/missile cannot penetrate a particular level of armour then it NEVER will not matter how many times it hits at the same point. I'm given to recall the story of a British Army Challenger 2 that got itself bogged down in soft ground near Basra a few years ago and got pounded by insurgents. It took numerous RPG hits to the hull and turret and countless small arms rounds but not a single breach of the armour occurred and all four crew members got home safely. You could never have a similar scenario in OFP/ArmA/ArmA2 as given enough hit with any weapon even a Challenger 2 would explode. I just feel the that ArmA franchise as a whole deserves more that a hit point system and and also a less simplified tank gunnery system would be good too. I guess I could also lump a higher fidelity flight model in there too along with the ability to individually arm aircraft prior to a mission rather than have set weapon loadouts for an individual model. I recognise that ArmA 2 is not nor should it be a high resolution simulation of every system on the battlefield but a little more realism here and there (as with the vast improvement to parachuting) would really be a positive addition to the game. Game design is a balancing act and I sure BIS made decisions that to them seemed right I just hope for an improvement in these areas as time goes by. In the meantime I know for a fact I'm going to really enjoy ArmA 2.
  22. I'm really pleased to see all the praise you and your mates have been getting Rock, very richly deserved. The Lynx is just a blast at low altitude. Seeing that instrument panel took me right back to my Lynx course at Aborfield last year, I'm not sure that is a good thing, it made my poor armourer's brain ache!
  23. At the bottom is a link the the 10 Downing Street petitions website, please only sign if you are a UK citizen or ex-pat. Original Daily Mail article Click on this link to go to the 10 Downing Street site to sign a petition to support our injured servicemen and women and their families:- Petition
  24. Tarnish

    How to disable "HDR"?

    OK granted the head anim isn't looking high enough I agree but in all honesty so what? Do you often feel the need to fire your weapon like this:- As that is the position you're in when this problem occurs. Your own real eyes are not the issue here, what ArmA is doing is simulating what your virtual character's eyes are doing in it's enviroment, your own eyes are of no concern to the computer as they will continue to react to the ambient light levels of your immediate real life surroundings.
×