Tigershark

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Suchey @ Feb. 22 2003,00:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">FL.A.C (Flashpoint Addon Collective) pronounced like flak ?<span id='postcolor'> I like this idea.....Flac.....has a ring to it...and the words don't sound like we are some committee which I'm sure the community will react negatively to

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (contraz0rz @ Feb. 21 2003,14:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Operation Flashpoint Addon Committee (OFPAC)<span id='postcolor'> Too formal

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Feb. 21 2003,14:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tigershark @ Feb. 21 2003,07:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Everyone is a comedian  <span id='postcolor'> I wasn't joking.<span id='postcolor'> Doh...sorry

Everyone is a comedian

Yes...there is a lotta love in this thread....but not that much. Any serious suggestions?

OK...so we have a number of interested groups who want to align with each other. What should we call this group of mods. We need a catchy name so we can say...we are a member of the such and such. The Cartel The Alliance

Viva la revolution! Actually guys...Avon Lady kicked this all off......I'm just running with it while she sits back with her legs up on the coffee table.

Guys...I think all this talk of committee and such is bogging us down a little. Let's start small and start with increased co-operation and communication between keys mods to stop duplication and share cpp stds. Then once we have a foundation...move to making a "committee" or central website as powerslide suggested (that idea has merit...although it's kind of an OFPEC for addons) Start small...BAS and RSS have already begun discussions....Codeblue is on board as well....we already share stuff with Project UK Forces. Let's self regulate first and then move to the "committee" idea.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kikill @ Feb. 21 2003,09:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">ofpec is already rating addons<span id='postcolor'> Kikill....well spotted....the Addons Section of OFPEC was started for this very reason....to make sure quality addons were hosted and therefore OFPEC Approved. Unfortunately...Wolfsbane and I differed on opinions of the importance of Addons in the community and sadly the whole addons section of OFPEC has become a graveyard. Other sites are doing a better job of hosting addons...albeit without quality control.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Leone @ Feb. 21 2003,09:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ummmmm...I don't think the idea should just be to make "popular" addons as such. Whilst it mightn't matter to you about Canadian forces, it does matter to them. And this sort of thing should be done in the spirit of inclusion not exclusion. There may well be plenty of addons that you will never use, but somebody out there may find them absolutely perfect....and I don't think this should (or could) be the sort of thing where we telll people what they can play OFP with. Just as a general principal, does everyone basically agree on the following aims: 1. Reduce and eliminate redundency. 2. Standardised config values as much as possible. 3. Open source on configs (put it in the read-me). 4. Co-operation on technique/skills. I am leaving out creating uberPBO's for the time being, because I don't know that there is an ideal way for the selection of the items to be placed in it yet...but that may change (I only just woke up). Also I still stand by the idea of having mod-teams etc having a forum of their own....not to choose who is making the best model/texture etc, but to concentrate on the above 4 aims, and to encourage more dialogue between everyone. Ultimately if it seems that everyone can't work together on making uberPBO's, then just drop it..... PS...those of you who are reading this thread just waiting for an outcome....participate plz...have your say...it's your community too  <span id='postcolor'> Objectives nicely summed up there Leone

Which why there needs to be one central controlling body. Mod teams can contribute or modify the tank pbo or the weapons pbo...but one body needs to recompile the PBO to incorporate the changes. Look guys...this aint gonna be easy...lets not kid ourselves......but just coz its hard doesn't mean we shouldn't try and set something up. I see the bigger problems in people saying "Why is XXX mods M4 better then my mods M4?...I like mine better so I'm gonna keep it." What I hope would happen is people say "XXX mods model is better, but YYY has better textures, ZZZ has better accessories and BBB has better iron sights...how can we pull these together to make the best and single M4" Thats the biggest challenge as I see it

Yeah...whatever happened to those Lavos HMMVs...we specifically didn't put these on our list of projects for the simple reason, as you said Schoeler...they would be the std. Those do great work. But they seemed to have died haven't they...what happened to them? The .50cal HMMV??

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Feb. 20 2003,17:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ Feb. 20 2003,09:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My campaign hinges on half their addons anyway. Â I still need a decent C-130 and a Wasp class LHD. Â Other than that, I have all the personnell for the west side.<span id='postcolor'> Well, here's the point we're all talking about. Do you think that the west addons you're using are superior, equivalent or inferior to BAS'? Or are BAS not appropriate? If not, why? Damage model? Weapons? Disagreement on realism features (uniforms, backpacks, radios, etc.)? What if the differences in requirements are relatively trivial and BAS would be will to add some new units to their Delta/Ranger line to accomodate real life models that are slightly different that are needed for OCB's mod? See the potential here? Elimination of redundancy, and more time for the OCB team to concentrate on gameplay more than anything else. It could even give them enough extra time to double the amount of missions and campaigns they originally intended to produce. If you get back in touch with the OCB team, tell them to have a look at this here thread. <span id='postcolor'> Excellently put Avon...and that's what I'm talking about..Hooah! If we can easily accomoate such a request it means a simple addition for BAS..and the mod in question can devote themselves to other tasks BAS or some other mods hasn't covered. Excellent stuff!

Actually..I have already spoken with someone from Codeblue who was very interested in using our M4s. I'm just not sure that he realises it means referencing them in the units CPP file....not us handing over the M4 for him to modify and create his own with.

Excellent point Soul Assasin...never thought of the added extra there regarding values for tanks and such. So...looks like we have a new era of co-operation here. The discussion should continue...but I think Soul and myself will take the BAS and RAS stuff offline.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Feb. 20 2003,14:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tigershark @ Feb. 20 2003,05:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Perhaps Avon it is still worth making an "open letter" and getting a series of people to sign it lending their support to the principle of this. Worth it?<span id='postcolor'> Cut the wishy-washy stuff and make the contacts yourself, personally, to those in the community that have shown potential and mutual respect. That includes some big fish out there. Reach high. <span id='postcolor'> Ooookay....I assume you don't want to contribute to the letter then. Fine...I have no problem drafting it myself...only offering the chance to have a hand in it.

Hellfish....we are definitely reading from the same page....and Peaknuckle..thanks for taking the stand...I think you share the vision. Guys...it sounds as if we all have embraced Avon's idea in principle..now we need to make it reality. As Hellfish said....I never set up BAS with the intention of dominating others mods....I did set it up to be the flag waver if you will. The group..that with your help..could champion greater co-operation and the sharing of addons that are already ready created. Why create new versions of these things when community recognised quality ones already exist...it just doesn't make sense. And if the bar gets raised...we should incorporate those changes into the community recognised std PBO (or 2 or 3 pbos as Avon lady said...I wasn't necessarily advocating just one pbo). This is getting me a little excited at the potential.....let's see how we go implementing this...and Avon Lady...great topic for the thread. You actually preempted me by about a week. A was preparing a "open letter to the OPF community" on this very subject. Nice to see it discussed here in a mature, humble and intelligent manner by all. Perhaps Avon it is still worth making an "open letter" and getting a series of people to sign it lending their support to the principle of this. Worth it? And Hellfish..thanks for the kind words....I'm not sure I deserve all that praise but thanks for the sentiment.

Thankyou Hellfish....good job of articulating what I weas effectively trying to say. And to be honest mate...I do think its the age that is the inhibiting factor. I tell you what...AKM47 is a personla friend of mine....I'll speak with him and enter into some kind of discussion with Redstar Studios...maybe we could share techniques and things as Avon Lady has suggested. These techniques might help lift the standard to Ranger/delta addon (assuming they haven't lifted the standard again) and it would result in great East addons with BAS quality without being a BAS project. They might be receptive to this....anyone invited them into this conversation?

Yes....I see where you are coming from....leave it with me Avon....let me discuss this internally and see if we can't follow through on your idea.

And BAS still has a philosophy of technology sharing...we aren't keeping anything secret. We do want to get all the bugs sorted out before we distribute stuff to other mods though.

You misunderstand me Avon....its not about swallowing up...its about forming a co-operative....a collection of addon makers...who all contribute their original weapons to one PBO.....it doesn't matter who has ultimate ownership of it...hell it could be a board of representatives from various mods. But a great start at making this community one wold be to have one standard set of weapons PBOs. Or do you enjoy having several M4s, SAWs, M40A1s, MP5s sitting on your machine not knowing which one to use in your mission because you dont know which pack your audience has. You're missing the bigger picture...this is bigger than BAS...I had just hoped tha BAS would through it reputation kick things off....but like I said...at the end of the day, who own the consolidated weapons pack is notas important as creating one to begin with.

Nice sig Matthijs!

Avonlady...as always an excellent suggetsion. Deadmeat has made an excellent post detailing some of the difficulties here....but let me add one more thing. Firstly..I hold high hopes for Red Star Studios...they are seeking to fill a gap that the community desperately needs. There are 2 issues I have with your suggestion other than the one highlighted by Deameat 1. This is the most obvious. The community has a long way to come in the spirit of co-operation before this becomes reality. I am an avid Falcon4 player and I can say that their community has matured at a fater pace than ours. Why you say? Because at some point...everyone decided to join forces to make a better game for the good of all and combine forces. Now AvonLady...you might say this is what you are suggesting...and in theory it is true. However....lets face facts....we cannot even use other peoples weapons when we make a mod...every addon maker has to ship his own version of the M4 with their addon. I had hoped that BAS would change this...that by establishing ourselves as a benchmark of quality people would willingly use our weapons pack and even CONTIRBUTE their models and improvements to the weapon pack in order to make the definitive pack for the good of the community. Unfortunately we haven't matured as a community to that level yet....and that hinders many of your good ideas. I have been able to convince the Codeblue mod that they might benefit from using the BAS wepaons pack as a unified weapons source....but other mods insist they can do it better. Is the BAS the best weapons maker....no...but we share a philosophy of quality...and if weapons makers want to contribute to the pack (with full credit) that we hopes set the standard...then we welocme this. Unfortunately many mods still insist on shipping their own weapons pack??? 2. This point is more subtle.....when I started OFPEC...the reason it was so successful in the early days was because we centered our goals and efforts on one simple task:Editing. We do not seek to be the best news site..the best mission site...it was all about focusing on one asepect but doing it very well. BAS is built on the same philosohy...we concentrate on what we know and do well....units we a re comfortable with. Now...as DM pointed out...we have some projects in the works but I still believe that focusing on one thing but doing it very well (ie. spec ops units of the US) we make our position that much stronger. Much in the same way that you focus on the FAQ Avonlady you have enjoyed much success. Your idea has merit...and it has certainly got me to thinking.......but I still believe that until the community can put egos aside and join forces to better the game for the collective, we have a long way to go before mods co-operate with each other. Another deciding factor here would obviously be the age differences between the F4 community and the adolescent culture of the OFP community. I'm sure this also influences things greatly. Fans of more mature years would probably agree with your ideas in principle (as I do)...but in practice this is a lot more difficult than it sounds.

9--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Feb. 19 2003,109)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Gourka @ Feb. 19 2003,00:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My respect to BAS. Your addons are the best. And you know why ? Because the two mission pack. Â This is pure alchemy when you mix two component and the result is... gold. So why not a Ballistic Mission Studio Cheers Gourka<span id='postcolor'> Good idea. People could submit missions using BAS addons. Â <span id='postcolor'> In the coming weeks we will be launching a Missions page in which we will invite people to send us their missions using our addons. Nagual is also hard at work making his own missions which will also be hosted by us.

The key there would be "single shot operation"