Stag

Ummm, anyone know how to pump up da volume on sounds? I got a nice, satisfying bang which sounds totally wimpy in game. Oh, BTW: Yeah, I know they look a bit ropey, but they are my first attempt. Still, I measured the range out to 600 yards, and calibrated the sight accordingly. blotting out the face with the wee arrow thingmie at the top of the vertical post got me a headshot on that enemy officer. The good news is he'll save a fortune on paracetomol.

Where's the LOD for custom crosshairs hidden, eg, for rifle scopes?

If you can't take a joke, you shouldn't be here. (British Soldier, Anon)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Dec. 05 2002,01:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Dec. 05 2002,15:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Wardog, flaming and personal attacks on other forum members won't be tolerated. This is the only warning you'll get.<span id='postcolor'> Perhaps his post count made him do it? Â </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Wardog Member Group: ModMaker Posts: 666<span id='postcolor'><span id='postcolor'> Cool! Perhaps I should have left in what I originally typed. :turnsheadaround360degreesandpukesvilegreenstuff:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ Dec. 03 2002,01:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So, it seems Denmark released the terrorist accused Zakajev. Now does this give Russia the right to attack Denmark and attempt to get him themselves? After all, similar things have been done before... :/<span id='postcolor'> You are such an obvious troll, you should have been banned months ago. Can any forum moderator look at this thread, or any other by this person and not guess what it would evolve into? Christ fella, get a life!

Ouch. That's got some unfortunate implictions for correctly modelling indirect fire...

Is it possible to make this happen? otherwise I just got some disjointed missions with no link

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MAsta_KFC @ Nov. 30 2002,17:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm not starting an argument, it was just a hypothetical question. Just one more question. In real life, how effective would those AA rockets be if used against MBTs? Is the Tunguska actually capable of targeting ground threats effectively?<span id='postcolor'> Apologies, but The number of arguments questions like that have started... Anyway, the SA19's do have a capability against ground targets, but don't have enough of a warhead to damage MBTs, perhaps not even Light armoured vehicles.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MAsta_KFC @ Nov. 30 2002,06:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just a question. Right now as I see it, the Tunguska doesn't fire at enemy MBTs. The question is, in real life, if the MBT was the primary threat, wouldn't the crew at least fire at it in defence? Right now, the Tunguska just sits there like a duck and waits to be destroyed. Granted, I doubt there would be times where you'd find a single Tunguska vs an Abrams, but still..? Otherwise an excellent vehicle. Keep up the good work! Â <span id='postcolor'> Because in real life, the only thing the Tunguska could really do to ANY MBT, not just Abrams is annoy the crew by chipping off the paint. Or run away. It's an anti-aircraft point defence vehicle. It protects tanks from aircraft, the tanks protect it from other tanks. It's an old argument. rather than re-starting it, why not just use search to see what has been said in the past?

It's a good choice for an attack aircraft for '85, and for 'Nam. Shape appears to be bang on, I assume you are still working on all textures. No weapons to drop, but flew quite well, though it has the common OFP aircraft problem of losing too much height when banking steeply. My first love before OFP was flight simulators which prided themselves on good flight models, So I think I can safely say the loss is 'way too much. Dunno how far you can tweak it, but if you can improve this, it will be very cool!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Dinger @ Nov. 27 2002,08:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Uhhh -- presidents and binocs. Check snopes.com. Â They're fake. Miles Teg: thanks for the kind words on the mines. The AP mines have an explosive charge that's not range-specific (so if you're standing behind a claymore, you will get killed). As for the "toe poppers" -- yes, you're right. Â If you're standing on top of them, you will get killed instead of just losing your legs. Â It's tough. Â In OFP the only way to make a soldier completely incapacitated is to kill him. Â We opted for this solution (and the close-in killing is done by a CoCmineblastlight I believe). Â If you want to fiddle with it, you'll have to de-pbo it. Â The POMZ-2M and Apple both run the Pomzfire.sqs script. Â To remove the blast, simply change the server-side CoCMineBlastLight with CoCMineBlastSpoof (or whatever it's called -- it's in the client-side part of the script). Â Of course, if you want to redistribute, talk to us first <span id='postcolor'> Not had a chance to play with the mines yet (glad someone finally did them!, but from what you said here, hows this for a suggestion? To make the mines nonlethal, and at the same time take the trooper out of the fight, is there any way to slap a "removeallweapons this" on troops with damage over a certain level? Just a thought.

I'm going to party-poop you both and tell you the MINIMUM range drops all the rounds into the sea... Good for fire missions if you wanted to fire from, say Everon to Malden though.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Nov. 25 2002,18:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Someone should look up a good law firm and toss this at them. I'm really serious. Even if the damage is assessed at $5-$10 dollars per owner, that's one hell of a fine to Creative. Any bigwig attornies out there playing OFP? Or are they too busy playing this? Your witness.<span id='postcolor'> Incredible! I never realised there was such a thing as yawnware before! Thank you, Lady, for sharing that with us

COLLEGE ENTRANCE EXAM FOR STUDENT ATHLETES Time Limit: 3 WEEKS 1. What language is spoken in France? 2. Give a dissertation on the ancient Babylonian Empire with particular reference to architecture, literature, law and social conditions -OR- Give the first name of Pierre Trudeau. 3. Would you ask William Shakespeare to (a) build a bridge (b) sail the ocean © lead an army or (d) WRITE A PLAY 4. What religion is the Pope? (check only one) (a) Jewish (b) Catholic © Hindu (d) Polish (e) Agnostic 5. Metric conversion. How many feet is 0.0 meters? 6. What time is it when the big hand is on the 12 and the little hand is on the 5? 7. How many commandments was Moses given? (approximately) 8. What are people in America's far north called? (a) Westerners (b) Southerners © Northerners 9. Spell -- Bush, Carter and Clinton Bush: Carter: Clinton: 10. Six kings of England have been called George, the last one being George the Sixth. Name the previous five. 11. Where does rain come from? (a) Macy's (b) Kmart © Canada (d) the sky 12. Can you explain Einstein's Theory of Relativity? (a) yes (b) no 13. What are coat hangers used for? 14. The Star Spangled Banner is the National Anthem for what country? 15. Explain Le Chateliers Principle of Dynamic Equilibrium -OR- spell your name in BLOCK LETTERS. 16. Where is the basement in a three story building located? 17. Which part of America produces the most oranges? (a) New York (b) Florida © Canada (d) Wisconsin 18. Advanced math. If you have three apples, how many apples do you have? 19. What does NBC (National Broadcasting Corp.) stand for? 20. The Cornell University tradition for efficiency began when (approximately)? (a) B.C (b) A.D. Signed ___

Budget cut owes edit:ralphwiggum, pic size > 100k

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Nov. 26 2002,12:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">or, you can make a trigger with condition: <hostage> distance player <= 1 (distance btw you and hostage is 1 or less) activate: [<hostage>] join player<span id='postcolor'> Interesting. Does that work in multiplay for client players? Using the waypoints method causes CTD in clients.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FoNeKiLL @ Nov. 26 2002,11:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">hmmm ok, is there a command that will put the captive into my group? like when i go near him, that way i can command him to where he needs to go.<span id='postcolor'> Standard "join", synched with "join and lead" waypoints.

I think you'll find the answer to that one here. That particular one is not something I've tried yet

Don't forget you have to do corresponding "Transport Unload" and "Get out" waypoints.

1. Create a helo, call it H1 (or whatever). In the Initialisation field put "this flyinheight 0". 2. Bung an H, visible or invisible underneath it. 3. Create a "Load" waypoint, and synch it with your troops "Get in" waypoint. put it on top of the Helo and H. 4. create a "Move" waypoint, and in the initialisation put "H1 flyinheight 10, or whatever height you want to fly at. bung it on top of the stack. 5. Create the rest of the waypoints as normal. Remember, you heard it here first!

You wouldn't be able to do the regular US army of the time properly. In them days the had an organisational system based on five; I think it was called pentad. Eg, for tanks, 5 vehicles make a platoon, 5 platoons make a company, five companies a battalion, 5 battallions a regiment... you get the idea. it was take all the way to the top; the pentagon was actually built with this organisation in mind; talk about obsessive! Anyways, you see the problem; 5 tanks to a platoon = 15 troops. OFP wouldn't be able to handle it. Of course, that doesn't mean you couldn't have any number of spooks running around in French Lizard camo and boonie hats, packing Swedish Ks.

Artillery's a bitch. You could build a whole mod around this problem. I wish I could help sort this out, but it sounds like a coding thingmie, or at least advanced scripting. I can point out what it should do, but not change what it does. If your can mod blow this open, you will rightfully take your place among the greats of OFP; regardless of what your beta textures are like Good luck, mate!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (quakergamer @ Nov. 24 2002,16:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Wardog you are right about it but OFP dosen't support shells being targeted by laser (and im pretty sure it dosent support laser guided shells) so I've amde it liek a regular shell. Anyway if you can givem e some suggestionms I will change it for the next version ...<span id='postcolor'> Copperhead is such a unique weapon i'd be tempted to ignore it and just use HEAT in direct fire. the problem is part and parcel of the fact that OFP does not handle indirect fire very well... at least nobody has found a fix for it YET. if I'm going over old ground here, pardon me; it's not something I've looked over seriously. Breaking down the problem: Artillery needs to treat its fire like mortar rounds. Since the nature of the game engine depends on the target being in LOS, Artillery, and only artillery AI needs the ability to see through the terrain to anywhere on the map. Since this was at one time a bug, I wonder how hard it would be to specifically implement? At extended ranges, the Artillery must not engage unless called by a spotter. On the face of it, not too bad. But when you consider that most Western Artillery Batteries consist of four tubes, and the crew of a Paladin is 3, it can't be just a simple matter of making the spotter the CO of the battery. As for the Copperhead: why not just use the missile settings? Correction: The US currently has no dedicated direct fire Anti-tank shell in 155mm. Their defence is being somwhere else, or being screened by other forces.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (quakergamer @ Nov. 24 2002,06:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (joltan @ Nov. 25 2002,03<!--emo&)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Three questions: The two included versions: the heat version has less then 10 shots (ugh) and seems to fire in a very flat arc over far distances, while the other has around 40 shots of shells and seems to have much less range then the other one. Also sights are different... what's the idea behind that? Why has the the shortranged version the kind of sight I'd expect from an artillery piece, while the long ranged version has a standard tank sight (or was it shilka)? Is there a possibility to do a woodland cammo for use on the original islands? And finally: I liked the sight of the shell version - it would be nice if it would be able to cover furher distances, too (ie. continue the scale to the max. range of the weapon). That way it would be easier to adjust the firing arc to the calls from a spotter.<span id='postcolor'> 1st) It has 10 shots because CopperHead and Copperhead2 shells are VERY VERY expensive and werent used a lot in the Gulf War. We are trying to be as realistic as possible. Also the range is like that becasue this si how OFP calculates the range; The speed wit hte max range. And if  i want to make indirect fire I need to set lower speed. Anyway its quite hard and it cant go beyond that., 2nd) The sights are different becasue the 155mm shell is ARTILLERY Shell, indirect fire. The copperhead ammo is DIRECT Fire like a normal tank shell so thats why it has normal Sight. Hope you get what I mean and yes we are working on a woodland camo, Cya<span id='postcolor'> QG, Copperhead is not a direct fire weapon. It is a Cannon Launched Guided Projectile with laser guidance. The Spotter paints the target with a laser, contacts the Arty, and they fire a round. One dead tank; No ifs, buts, or maybes. It doesn't give a shit what it hits. You are right about it being expensive; the actual loadout for a Paladin is only 2 Copperhead. M712 Copperhead

http://www.natosoldier.com/