bugkill

dirty, i'm gonna send you a PM and discuss your addon (i see potential in your last screenie).

i want to be able to change the position of the gunner in hawk's c-130 and move him in the cargo area near the ramp. i want him to be standing, so that he looks like a loadmaster or flight engineer. i use the c-130 for HALO and paradrop missions and i wanted it to look more realistic. any ideas? please post.

Okay, download either Kegety's Tools or Eliteness and unpack the Characters.pbo file located in the ArmA\Addons folder. in the Woodland bdu\data folder are all of the colormap files you need. Copy all of these files and then paste them into the extracted Characters\Data folder. Using either KEgety's pbo tool or Eliteness, re-pack Characters.pbo and move it back to Arma\Addons and click Yes to overwrite. don't forget to do a backup of the characters.pbo file.

crye=multicam

the problem with some of you guys saying "DPM" or "AUSCAM" is that those cams are not worn by US forces, which the game is using as it's main unit. also, the acu has yet to be issued Army wide and there are many units that don't have. like i said before, the acu is fine, but the camo scheme should have stayed the same (woodland and 3 color desert) or went with the crye camo. the use of it in iraq is not much of a big deal given the type of operations we are doing over there. it is an urban environment and camoflauge is not a big issue. all that crap we wear is going to give us away anyway and unless you are on a special mission team, your ass won't be wearing anything short of your body armor and uniform. it is all about the mission because mission dictates what you do and don't wear. there is a time to wear the acu with no problems (patrols in urban areas), but there are also times when it is just not the right uniform to wear on specific operations (reconnaisance and UW missions).

well, i don't mind if they are acu's, but they have to be correct. it is really pissing me off to see so many games or "sims" that get our uniforms wrong time and time again. there are way too many photos on the net and even the ofp and vbs1 community have already released acu addons that are more accurate than the crap BIS just pushed out. like i said before, they could have posted on these very forums and made a thread for us US Army soldiers to post pics or give info to accurately portray our forces. i truly wonder who they sought consultation with on this subject.

the only problem is that it looks like crap because it is inaccurate (no arm pockets or velcro), so they pretty much missed the nail.

i would venture to say that all the uniforms, minus the dcu's, could be used. the marpat camo would need to be for a marine addon because US Army troops don't wear it. the acu and bdu versions should have been available from the start. Clavicula is correct about SF teams not wearing acu's, but it is more of an option, not a rule. we wore what we wanted and usually it was the good ole dcu's in afghanistan, but some teams wore acu's on several occasions. so, the acu, bdu, and marpat are the camo schemes that fit best with the islands because they are not in the middle east or desert enviroments. i hope to see some desert islands down the road though.

cool, hope to see pics. i'm going to wait on some modding tools. it just does not look right for my tastes and we need to see some models that feature better gear and is more in tune with what operators really wear.

rgr , keep forgetting.

exactly EDIT* looking at making this: [img/]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/bugkill/real%20world/040617m7371b0027vb.jpg[/img]

yeah, i was laughing my ass off when i saw that. i can't believe that after vbs1, they would showcase such bad unit uniforms and gear. i was mainly talking about the camo and hopefully it can pass as a flightsuit

personally, i feel that the acu is cool (as far as how it fits and not having to iron it ), but they should have either kept the camo that we already have (the woodland and 3 color desert) or use the crye camo.

personally, i feel that the acu is cool (as far as how it fits and not having to iron it ), but they should have either kept the camo that we already have (the woodland and 3 color desert) or use the crye camo.

, yeah, i heard of 35th sig. and i'm glad i never went over there. i felt the same way you did when i got to group. i was in the 82nd (325th AIR), 101st (502nd INF), NATO, 1AD, and then SFG. getting my ass to group was the best ticket as far as being in a tactical unit (can't beat the netherlands). i got there and i thought that us support guys would not be doing the "team" guy shit, boy was i wrong! i never did so much firing in my life (even when i was infantry) and i got to receive some kick ass training. i just ETS and now i'm in the guard (back in the infantry). i could not get my CAB for iraq (2003) because at the time it did not exist (i did raids and patrols because of my past experience in the infantry) and they want all these BS docs in order to get it. it was over two years ago and most of the people have moved on, no way i can get witness statements. oh, well! when i saw knuckleheads getting it for getting mortared and never leaving the FOB, i just said "screw it". ooops, sorry if i got off topic. EDIT* i plan on making some SOF operators wearing the desert flight suit when i crack open the marpat guys. i think that would look better given the fact the acu's are jacked in this game. who in the hell did BIS consult for this game. should have talked to me and others on this forum about this stuff.

you want to resize the image first and then copy and paste. it is a little trial and error, but it works. 1) you copy and paste to see how big/small the actual patch is on the .paa file (which is in tga format). 2) if not the right size, press "undo paste", go back to the tab/patch .tga and resize the image (the patch file, not the .paa). 3) just keep repeating those steps until you are satisfied with the results. the deal with the full color flag is one that you and i are very familiar with (i served in spec ops also ). i have no problem with the subdued patch (we had both of them), but the color flag was used most often, unless at night (we switched to the IR flag). i'm thinking of just making these forces all conventional because some of the infantry units share the same files of the SF units. i'm thinking about cracking open the marpat addon (for personal use) and use them as my SF unit, just gotta change the textures. edit* you want to go ahead and convert all those us.soldieracu.os, etc. files to .tga, better that way. i have made various soldiers with different combat patches and tabs. that is why i'm not going to mix up the SF units, just gonna make them infantry from the 82nd (i served there and i chose them over the 101st, i thought my time in the eight deuce was better ) and they will have different combat patches (more realistic).

here ya go http://www.militaryclothing.com/IBS....07.html and here is an update of the SF recon: [img/]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/bugkill/armed%20assault/arma2006-12-0917-30-24-71.jpg[/img] and the SF operator was reassigned back to group: [img/]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/bugkill/armed%20assault/arma2006-12-0918-00-47-71.jpg[/img] he was in 1st ranger batt. prior to selection: [img/]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/bugkill/armed%20assault/arma2006-12-0918-00-57-97.jpg[/img] gotta work on those pockets, not good enough for me and i will try to get a new camo for the SF recon helmet.

the problem i have is that BIS did not make the acu's correct. they forgot the arm pockets and i had to rely on "sewn" on patches. gonna look for some textures that have pockets and see if i can correct this problem.

some more [Do not holink images greater than 100kb]http://Do not holink images greater than 100kb.photobucket.com/albums/v495/bugkill/armed%20assault/arma2006-12-0912-33-09-52.jpg[/Do not holink images greater than 100kb] [Do not holink images greater than 100kb]http://Do not holink images greater than 100kb.photobucket.com/albums/v495/bugkill/armed%20assault/arma2006-12-0912-27-48-02.jpg[/Do not holink images greater than 100kb] [Do not holink images greater than 100kb]http://Do not holink images greater than 100kb.photobucket.com/albums/v495/bugkill/armed%20assault/arma2006-12-0912-25-16-19.jpg[/Do not holink images greater than 100kb]

here is some pics of some testing i've been doing. i just wanted to add a mixture of different units by using armpatches: SF Recon: [Do not holink images greater than 100kb]http://Do not holink images greater than 100kb.photobucket.com/albums/v495/bugkill/armed%20assault/arma2006-12-0913-39-55-36.jpg[/Do not holink images greater than 100kb] 82nd Airborne (former SF operator): [Do not holink images greater than 100kb]http://Do not holink images greater than 100kb.photobucket.com/albums/v495/bugkill/armed%20assault/arma2006-12-0823-36-20-94.jpg[/Do not holink images greater than 100kb] 82nd airborne infantryman: [Do not holink images greater than 100kb]http://Do not holink images greater than 100kb.photobucket.com/albums/v495/bugkill/armed%20assault/arma2006-12-0823-31-04-22.jpg[/Do not holink images greater than 100kb] SF operator: [Do not holink images greater than 100kb]http://Do not holink images greater than 100kb.photobucket.com/albums/v495/bugkill/armed%20assault/arma2006-12-0823-34-06-16.jpg[/Do not holink images greater than 100kb] ranger combat patch: .[Do not holink images greater than 100kb]http://Do not holink images greater than 100kb.photobucket.com/albums/v495/bugkill/armed%20assault/arma2006-12-0912-26-54-57.jpg[/Do not holink images greater than 100kb] i only did this to give the units more of a different look and i wish that someone can model some SF units with some mich 2001 helmets

yeah, just messing around to get the hang of it. i'm gonna give my SF units some unit patches, so you can have the different look of the soldiers. this was just a test and i'm gonna make a better patch to fit the model.

zerg63, did you get my PM?

zerg63, did you get my PM?

dude, are you serious? i just played many games that are considered hard on systems with no issues. to say my card is 2 yrs old is irrelevant, it has nothing to do with the fact that BIS could have toned down the graphics in order to provide better gameplay. i'm not thinking about myself on this issue and i feel that the game should not be harder on my machine (only when making missions in the cities) than vbs1, GRAW, and other gfx heavy games. you appear to believe that eye candy is more important than gameplay and i totally disagree with you, especially when it concerns the ofp franchise. armed assault should have had the same gfx level as vbs1 or a tad bit lower, with new animations and features. they did not have to re-invent the wheel, just needed to take the tarnish off it. there are many improvements to the game, but there are still limitations that should have been addressed (listed some in my previous post). i felt that they were ignored and that most of the concentration was on the graphics, which is not a big priority with the ofp community. ofp needed an overhaul on the graphics side, but not an overhaul x2. you are entitled to your opinion and we just differ. i enjoy armed assault, but i'm not going to fork over more money for a new gfx card, when i have nice vid card that has played all the games that have been out (AA is the first one i had a problem with). Edit: by the way, i have a x800xt all in wonder 256mb and i have yet to not be able to play any games that are heavy on gfx. See you didn't need to make a double post to add that line - Placebo

well, i don't have a low end card (ati all in wonder 800 series 256mb) and my system has always been able to play gfx heavy games, but the gameplay of those games allow the graphics to be that high. the type of gameplay for armed assault does not require a high dose of graphics in order to be able to create and simulate large scale battles without too much sacrifice to your machine. i'm not defending those that need new computers, but i'm pointing out that armed assault should have no business trying to compete graphically against other "squad based" shooters. ofp needed a definite facelift, but it did not have to come to this high of a price. i would gladly trade in the lack of moving while reloading or changing weps for toned down graphics anyday. i would love to trade in the high end scenery for more units and large scale urban battles, you bet. this armed assault would be perfect for my xbox 360, but the PC version does not need to be this way, just my honest opinion.