Uziyahu--IDF

Yeah, some kind of erosion modelling on the terrain.

In my experience, the sights on the M203 take too long to employ and are damned deceptive once you do, just like in the movie "Hamburger Hill". I nearly "bolo'd" on the M203 qualification range (you only got 3 shots) because I was trying to rely on the sights. It's quicker and easier to guesstimate the angle on the shot.

Balance sucks, but there are ways to strike a better balance without sacrificing realism. For example, with small-arms, incorporating availability, encumbrance and reliability would be a way to balance out the AK-47 with the M16. The AK-47 is less accurate than the M16. The AK-47 uses a heavier round, meaning you can't carry as many rounds, but it has greater stopping power. The AK-47 is easier to get and less expensive, meaning that it is more common and easier to equip your troops with. A dirty AK-47 is more reliable than an immaculately-cleaned M16. An AK-47 is heavier than an M16. The M16 is lighter, more accurate, less reliable, and less hard-hitting than the AK. It's easier to accessorize an M16 than it is an AK. In the end, a good player will know how to effectively wage war with whatever weapon he was "issued" in the game. You learn the strengths and weaknesses of your equipment and that of your enemy and you seek out advantages where they can be found.

I disagree. While there are elements missing, such as claymores and melee combat, OFP:CWC's demo accurately simulated my experiences at the Joint Readiness Training Center when it was based at Ft. Chaffee, AR. EA's "SEAL Team" was considered an infantry sim back in '92. OFP is the first tac-shooter to touch it. Rogue Spear, SWAT 3, and SWAT 4 are sufficiently realistic to be considered simulations for teaching CQB tactics. Trying to organize that kind of training in real-life comes at considerable expense. There are elements of that training that are inexpensively worked-out on a LAN, such as communication, fire and movement, and teamwork. Yes, there is always room for improvement, but even something with graphics of the caliber of "SEAL Team" can be called a simulation. I was in an Army Blackhawk simulator that had graphics that resembled Enemy Engaged. Anything is better than nothing, because you can do in a sim things that cost more and are far more dangerous. Before sims, coaches talked about "visualizing" making the basketball swish through the hoop. We no longer need to visualize success. We can "virtualize" it.

If that was Iraq, I don't think there are that many AK74's in Iraq. Most of those are in Afghanistan from the war with the Soviets in the '80's. Iraq has more of the older 7.62 x 39mm AK's. It could have been a Zastava, which I believe fires the same round.

Heh, the hippy liberal photographer wears denim bell-bottoms. Good-looking addon! It'll make for some very entertaining cut-scenes.

I'm not sure, but I think I have seen a single track get damaged in OFP:E and the tank only be able to drive in circles. I would like to see forward/reverse slippage (losing of traction) on wheeled and (less so) tracked vehicles. It seems like the whole vehicle can slip laterally (drift?), but you never see tires spin on gravel or sand. Obviously, I don't want the ridiculous slippage of HALO 1's Warthog, but I would like to see tires slip on grass in the rain, or in sand or gravel or on a too steep incline, etc. And tanks getting stuck in mud would add to the tactical nature of the tank combat. Tanks rolling over seems to be very dangerous to the crew, though I'm not sure why, not being an armour man, myself.

I read that side doorguns weren't used much on the Hind. In Afghanistan, they would add a rearward-firing machinegun for extraction under fire. I'm sure that would have been more common on a Hip than on a Hind. I read that they didn't use the troop-carrying capability of the Hind that much, but that the 3rd man would be used to man a machinegun or act as a dismounted guard.

Don't expect PC Gamer U.S. to do right by Bohemia Interactive. They are Red Storm Entertainment lovers from WAYYY back. Yeah, Nogova has a small lake, too. I agree that it is a fairly conservative article. Having played the heck out of OFP:E, I can say with great confidence that Armed Assault is going to be a big pleaser. The dynamic A.I. of support vehicles coupled with support waypoints, in addition to the guard waypoint, which frees up that unit to travel ACROSS THE ISLAND in combat support of a fellow unit needing help, makes its easy to whip up immensely unpredictable and replayable missions. I can only imagine what will be possible in a beefier PC editor.

Cotton ripstop is pretty light and flimsy. Is the U.S. Army still using it? I think this soldier model may be one of the most realistic-looking of any I've seen in any game. Don't really need so much shading both above AND below the black straps across the legs.

It seemed to work easily enough in Soldner, but then, I think that they didn't have a whole lot of buildings on the terrain at once in that game.

I wanted to comment on the use of the metallic reflective quality of surfaces of some of the addons I've been seeing. I trust that this isn't off-topic in the "Addons & Mods: Discussion" forum? You SHOULD NOT use that effect on camo'd vehicles that are probably painted with a FLAT paint. Â One of the objects of painting a vehicle with FLAT paint in a camo scheme is to reduce the shine and silhouette of the vehicle. Â If it has a metallic reflection, it then provides the inverse of a silhouette, a bright outline, to its surfaces. Â This makes it stand out while surrounded by natural vegetation and landscape. You also SHOULD NOT use that effect on textures that are meant to circumvent actually modelling the surfaces depicted in the textures. Â For example, if "spokes" in a BMP's wheels are created using a texture, these spokes will practically disappear when the surface produces a high metallic shine across the whole surface in a setting or rising sun. Â The result will be a wheel that has almost no 3-D quality to it. (Bump-mapping seems to provide a way to give a 3-D quality to textures in those kind of lighting conditions.) The object of camo is to look more natural and less man-made (even men are "man-made"). Â If you add a metallic reflection to models that are trying to be camo'd, you're undoing the whole process of camo'ing the vehicle. If you add a metallic reflection to surfaces that have a 3-D texture, all 3-Dness of the texture will practically disappear in the reflection of light given off by the metallic surface. And for your info, even the green paint job on an A-10 Warthog is there for camo. Â That bird isn't meant to shine. Air Force and Navy birds can afford to shine because they are usually stationed well away from the enemy's reach while they are parked on the ground and because they usually own the skies while they are up in the air. The A-10, OV-10 Bronco, and birds like these make an attempt to be camo'd. Â I can only assume that it is because these birds operate closer to the front lines and at lower altitudes. Army helos all have "subdued" (i.e., non-reflective camo) paint jobs. Blued metallic parts on firearms normally have somewhat of a faint metallic shine to their finishes and some black plastics.

My point was not that the reflective quality wasn't of a pleasing degree, but that on flat camo paint jobs or 3-D textures it shouldn't be there AT ALL. In the first case it wouldn't happen in real-life. In the second case the detail of the textures totally disappears, leaving you with a completely flat 3-D object of a single color, completely washing away any of the texture's details. (For example, a very small complaint, but in Operation Flashpoint: Elite, the muzzle of one of the M16's loses its hole when the light reflects on the very end of the barrel, breaking what was a very nice work-around to actually modelling the hole.)

You know what would be nice? I'd like to have an idea of the number, type, size and location of the military units at Guba's disposal at the beginning of his campaign, then have an update of that information from day to day, somewhat like that Flash presentation that was made for the Great Soviet War. This would really help me figure out how to populate my missions more realistically. I can already deduce that some soldiers will be sleeping come night-time, some will be patrolling, some guarding, etc., but are we talking about a military presence so large that enemy encampments will be in the forests, too, or a presence spread so thinly that no area is easy for the Soviets to defend? For example, if the only Spetsnaz camp took heavy casualties on a certain date in the official or (non-canonical?) Red Hammer campaign, I could reason that there would be fewer Spetsnaz to deal with after that date. It would be something if that kind of battle history could be compiled or constructed for pre-Armed Assault OFP.

If you can't wait 'til H1 2006, just spend $150 on an X-Box and another $40 on a copy of OFP:E and join the rest of us enjoying many of these features, already.

Anybody seen any more news on that Hind with the GORGEOUS texturing? I think it'll go nicely with the new Mi-26 by Our (Russian) Weapons.

If the NAA Movie doesn't work quite right, it helps to adjust the view distance for your game. 850 - 900 seems to work correctly. It worked fine in ECP. I tried to get it to work in FFUR (would have looked great with the new units), but it stops where the M1 tank is firing the civilian man out of its main gun.

Here's the .pbo for the NAA Movie... NAA Movie .PBO in a .Zip

Strange, the file seems to have gone missing. Â Uploading, again. Should be available, now.

Here is a video capture of the very old NAA (Northern American Alliance squad) Movie in OFP:CWC. I'm playing the mission.pbo in OFP:R v1.96 with ECP v1.085. It's very difficult to record a version that has everything perfect, so you don't see so many tracers flying past the squad leader in the last firefight. (I had one version where a Russian launched grenade was flying through the air in slo-mo. That was cool.) NAA Movie (55 Megs, Windows Media)

Yes, one of the earliest user-made terrains is West Leach Spring, which is a small portion of the NTC, but it is quite bare, though the terrain is VERY good. I think you can find it in the island/terrain addons at http://www.ofp.info/

Just because a weapon gets good reviews, it doesn't mean that it is standard issue. The MP5 is still the recognized workhorse submachinegun of Spec Ops. It lasts a long time and does what it is supposed to, two reasons it is still found in inventories. If you argued for switching to something not a submachinegun, there would be more merit to your argument, as trends seem to be getting away from subguns in favor of harder-hitting weapons.

LMAO - that looked Awesome! ...The driver jumping out before it exploded The G's it was pulling he probably got motion sickness. Off-topic, but that would be hilarious to pull on an opposing team in multiplayer, as a prank. Have a whole bunch of those trucks at your end, then fire them towards the opposing team. A gigantic WTF reaction as they see these trucks hurtling towards them. :-D ...

LMAO - that looked Awesome! ...The driver jumping out before it exploded I'm curious. Could mass be turned down in soldiers to produce a sort of ragdoll effect?

You work for CodeMasters, Longjocks? Â Well, that explains a lot.