krzychuzokecia

I'd like to point out, that Steam Store page for Contact have no mention of any new game mode. There's a single-player campaign, but MP is limited to Zeus, Warlords and Combat Patrol. Also store page explicitly states that new gear is scripted only in SP campaign, and serves no purpose in MP. I'd gladly exchange ayy lmaos for few new vehicles for Livonians. For example 4x4 and truck, and maybe one armored vehicle or helicopter. Just enough to make them look less like AAF redux. If BI insists on going all X-COM, then some proper aliens would be nice touch. At least then we could have a true hard sci-fi mil-sim. Otherwise it seems like unfinished stuff hastily wrapped in an alien story (as @The Man Without Qualities said). Well, BI (in their marketing genius) decided to add to this DLC a true mil-sim content which was expected by community from the day one (namely: Russians and recon UGV). This is enough for many to catch their attention, but they are put off by the sci-fi story. Which seems to be rather bland rip-off of Arrival, which in turn is a rip-off of 2001. I'm sorry to say, but I doubt that BI writers can pull it off. In fact, BI seems sure that they cannot, so we are promised a shootout with Russians. Yay! Then why going for the ayy lmao aspect at all? Just to show we're different, we're original? You're really not. I'd gladly pay for just the Russians, or just the recon UGV, or just another fake country (but not AAF retexture), or CBRN items and procedures DLC. Combined it would make a no-brainer expansion for me. But this one cliche element makes me question the whole package. And I'm not against sci-fi in mil-sim (or other way around), but even BI aliens are just... well, they're not even there. Ayy lmao!

@froggyluv I agree completely, but that would require real work and a courage to make something different (ayy lmaos are such a cliche, especially ayy lmaos are so peaceful but our military wants to kill them anyway! cliche), and not politically correct.

Oh, the jokes write themselves! I'm glad I'm not the only one to feel like that. From what I see, all we get for this DLC (priced almost as high as the full game!) are: 1. a bunch of retextured units: Russians - funny thing, different texture for them is left in game data since the beginning, Livonians who are just woodland AAF, 2. few weapons: new AK-12 variants - I suppose, knowing how things work in game art development, that these models may have been already made during Apex development (rarely art studios get back to remake old stuff, case in point Livonian Offroad which still have damaged passenger doors, like post-apo Altis car), Mk14 but with smaller magazine - with mag proxies being a thing now it's... pathethic, Shotgun - Kozlice is back, yay! But wasn't that gun taken from DayZ? MSBS/Grot-ish bullpup thingy - OK, that's new but that 2x scope/carry handle taken from Croatian VHS-2 doesn't fit the rest of the gun at all, 3. a bunch of CRBN equipment - that's cool, but again I have a strong feeling that this content was being made for Laws of War, but missed the deadline (this suspicion is even stronger due to the fact that both Contact and Orange/LoW were made by BIS Amsterdam), this includes the new UGV, 4. tractor - this is just laziness, not only it's the same old Arma 2 model, which we already have in A3 thanks to CUP and/or other ports, but it also doesn't fit to the futuristic style of other civilian vehicles (note that this model is some kind of 80s era Zetor tractor, and even in 2019 those are a rare sight, much less in 2035), 5. new island - well, OK, thanks for that, 6. ayy lmao objects and campaign focused on dealing with ayy lmaos, who are apparently just McGuffins. So the really new stuff are island, two guns (MSBS and Kozlice), CRBN and ayy lmao objects. Campaign... I have a feeling it will be a failure - I liked movie Arrival (Amy was no accident) but it seems that even this idea is not realized completely in Contact, and we'll have a traditional shootout with Russians over McGuffin. So for all of it's revolutionary content, this DLC is story-wise just micro-East Wind, but with McGuffin being so out of place, that half of the community (which doesn't end on just these forums) is enraged. Had BIS went with something more down to Earth (for example old Soviet WMDs exploding in former bases in Livonia - contaminated Soviet bases are real thing in Poland), nobody would really bat an eye, and we all would be dancing in circle, happy that we finally get Russian component of CSAT.

LWP infantry was never released. I may be wrong, but old screenshots show infantry models by Vilas (so those could be probably found in one of Vilas' Packs), while latest ones were made by Offtime (I guess gone for ever). As for LWP mod releases, all that's available: Star Truck Pack Kraz Pack T-72M Mi-24D Kamaz Pack. I was 99% sure that T-55 was also released, but it seems that my memory is faulty here. Also thanks to @spooky lynx for inspiration to check all available OFPR.info backups (I guess all of them have that stuff, but some doesn't show everything). As for OFPL - most of their stuff is archived on Armaholic, you can find it easy by searching for OFPL tag. I haven't uploaded Lechistan island there yet, because it requires a lot of addons (namely Mapfact ones). I hope someday I'll get back to this.

Is outstanding work Comrade! Deserves Hero of Soviet Union medal! Imperialists die!

THEY FINALLY STOLE THAT CAR! Fake OFP in Arma 3 courtesy of @CUP - also with best wishes to @slatts and all the good people working on Conflict '85!

Interesting article. I watched some years ago a document about Chernobyl wildlife and I was amazed how easily nature adapted itself to the post-explosion land, and how fast it started to thrive. BTW: for those interested in how much background radiation is around us there's always a helpful XKCD.

@Hideki Ishimura What's exactly the problem? The difference in appearance of both units? If so, WW4 Ext uses Kenoxite's excellent (or terrible, depends on personal preference) OFP Materials. Standalone version of OFP Materials contains example files for addon makers, to assist in creating Materials-compatible mods.

I agree that Arrowhead was indeed a huge release, a sort of mil-simmer wet dream. To be honest, I think that Arma 3 is also an answer for the same question - how to make the most realistic combat game ever. Even though it was met with... mixed emotions on this very Forums. To this day there are people who whine about A3 futuristic features, even though, at the very basic simulation level, it presents a 1980s military technology at best. And most of the art represents 1990s equipment. I personally love most of the A3 realism-focused features, and couldn't care less about the looks (afterall we have addons for that). But it seems that community has also changed through the years - I remember backlash against stamina/fatigue-induced weapon sway, or the uncertainty about radar/sensor and data-link changes. Interestingly, both features were opposed by KoTH/Battle Royale players. So, is Bohemia a different company today? Yes it is. But does devs lack energy? Well... I don't know. They sure have enough energy for starting new projects like Ylands and Vigor. Seems to me that the energy is still there, but with company getting bigger, they have to focus on more profitable markets. The trap of successful independent dev going big. There's one area, however, where BI haven't changed, and... well... I think whole industry starts going this way. What I'm talking is the very problem that caused the BIS-CM rift - long development and bugged releases. It seems like what was outrageous in 2009, is now industry standard with all those early access, greenlights and beta-tests extending ad infinitum. Guess if Bohemia would be making Game 2 today, team CM would just push it into Steam Early Access and happily collect quids. At least BIS seems to actually fix and support their products (DayZ finally released after all these years), as opposed to some of devs who put out early access games one after another (Ark anyone?). That's interesting to hear - as I've said, back then I was strongly on Team 'Hemia and I probably would burn you alive for admitting even slightest interest in fake Flashpoint. Funny enough, after playing DR demo last year, I don't think it was that bad. In fact it seems like something fresh and entertaining when compared to your run of the mill dumbed down console corridor shooters like CoD etc. It still suffers from problems, mostly due to being console friendly (FoV, controls cramped between 8 buttons, because why use full keyboard?). But it goes into a really interesting territory of slow-paced, team-based game. It's not so far out like Arma, gameplay-wise it's actually quite similiar to original OFP. Games like Squad show that there is interest on the market for similiar stuff. That's very true! Hell, the same can be told about anything really. Big bucks change everything, and while pursuing the profit is not bad or evil per se, it starts to be a problem when quality suffers.

A sad non-update of sorts. First of all: from reading the files, I don't think that AIs were ever able to use bandages - should not really be a surprise since bandages were part of original Mapfact Rucksacks addon, along with other interesting features never introduced in WW4 Ext (like Mapfact's radio and tent systems). Still, I agree that bandages are useful, and should be integrated. However, it seems to me that at the moment the AI rucksack management is completely broken altogether. Not only cannot AIs rearm (either from their own rucksacks, or ammo bearers), but rearming from fallen comrades will freeze the game. Since I don't really know what is happening in the scripts (everything looks fine and dandy), I'm unable at the moment to provide any solutions apart from don't use rucksacks with AI. If anyone have any ideas, feel free to post them - help is appreciated. In other news, I posted an outdated hotfix on ModDB. It fixes issues with FWatch and Personal Menu, which Kenoxite posted here in 2016. Since not everyone reads these forums, I hope some will find that useful.

Magnificent work! Speaking of which - thanks for all the great addons you made for us through all these years!

Honestly, that vid is pretty meh. It just recaps main points of Gamasutra, RPS and Eurogamer articles, bringing nothing new on the table. In light of this, author calling his vid a documentary and asking for donations seems to me rather pathethic, but... It's 2019. Kids today don't know how to use Google, so I guess there's a purpose for such videos. And, because it's still in our minds and hearts, I have to take a new stance on the Great Bohemia-Codemasters War of 2009. Back in the day, I was rooting for BIS and denouncing Codies treason and theft just like everyone. But back in the day I was really nothing but a teenager, and after a decade I have a quite different outlook on the affair. Flame away, but now I think that BIS was very lucky that they lost only Operation Flashpoint brand. See - the company signed a contract with Codemasters, committed themselves to make OFP2 and Elite, and failed to deliver. And games are business, quite a big one, so missed deadlines equals to loss of money (either already invested, or projected income). In theory Codemasters could sue BIS into oblivion, and let's be honest - BIS is not really good in keeping up with their promises. We should remember that before 2005 (release of Elite and secession from Codies), BI was involved not only with OFP2 but also VBS and (even earlier) OFP spin-off - Independence Lost. Not to mention supporting the bug-ridden (like every BIS release) Operation Flashpoint. It seems that most of their projects of Codemasters era failed (including Elite). That makes BIS a rather untrustworthy business partner. Fans will say that BIS is not making games for money, but... do we really believe that after seeing games like Argo and Vigor? Not to mention that VBS was essentially a cash-grab - jumping into lucrative market with little-to-none new development (remember that new content for VBS was created by members of OFP modding scene). With that in mind, BIS losing just the brand is quite a lucky outcome. Would they expect Codemasters to forget about losses and failed projects? And, correct me if I'm wrong, I remember that Operation Flashpoint was in fact a Codies-invented name (though based on the Flashpoint name used earlier in development). The 2009 press-release, where BIS angrily responds to Codies marketing their Dragon Rising as an official sequel to OFP is just mindblowing. I mean, if Codies own the brand, why can't their product be called official sequel? For adult me that press-release reads a little bit as a childish tantrum, and a little bit as a hidden advertisement for BIS own Arma series. Which, by the way, needed all the publicity after the unfortunate Armed Assault. BIS holier-than-thou attitude, deciding what is and what is not official or true sequel was nothing more than virtue signalling. Which is a shame, because quality of their product (Arma 2) spoke for itself, especially when compared to Dragon Rising. So while Dragon Rising may not have been a true Operation Flashpoint-style game, it's still an official sequel no matter how far it went from original genre (SWAT series comes to mind here). So yeah - video games are a big business, and business is a thing for adults. The 2009 Great Bohemia-Codemasters War was none of that. It was an emotional outburst, and an example of mob mentality. Both of which have it's place in the world, but seem rather funny when it comes to my product is better than your product. In the mean time we also found out that BIS is not really better or worse developer than others. BIS acquisition of Altar in 2010 killed UFO franchise (and UFO fans to this day hate BIS just like we hate Codemasters), BIS games still have problems with their releases (either delayed or full of bugs - though with early access this had became an industry standard), and we see that BIS passion for their games have vanished to some extent, being replaced by pursuit of profit. Which is not bad - their families have to eat. But it's obvious that nowadays, instead of developing original ideas (like very unique Take on Mars which is now abandoned), they are jumping into existing lucrative markets (Argo, Vigor, Ylands - all are clones of popular franchises). One could say that BIS have become the very monster it claimed it will never be. Or maybe they just grown up? Sooner or later, all of us do.

PR Mod and WW4Ext have almost nothing in common, apart from the fact that both use WW4 as their basis (so do other mods) and that I was involved to some extent with both. Total replacement is a type of mod which replaces vanilla units/models with it's own content. WW4 and WW4Ext are not total replacement mods, however if you'd like to see @kenoxite vision of what total replacement should be, please check out Extended Effects (ExtFX). @barccy I haven't forgot about you! I'm still investigating the rucksack issue, I'm just kinda busy with real life, so sorry for taking so long!

I think this is it @hitman1987

Since this refers to the pre-Resistance campaign, using pre-Resistance addons, the root of the problem may be lack of RequiredAddons=[] dependancy in config. For some reason, after releasing Resistance, it was quite common to encounter false missing addon errors (especially when playing pre-Resistance stuff), and to counter that BIS added addon dependancy in config (and IIRC addon preloading). I know it happened to me a lot when using some ancient stuff (like first Kegetys' addons). Another bad practice of the time was introducing several CfgPatches sections in one config/pbo - after Resistance addonmakers abandoned this habit. Somebody haven't read the FAQ! (Avon Lady's description makes XMP campaign look less than interesting though...)

Anno 1602 is up for grabs on Uplay. Giveaway ends on 23rd December.

Well, it can't be more open then it already is. Maybe you will enlighten us? From my experience the only thing affecting trajectory (or should I say - perceived trajectory) is projectile initSpeed and zoomMin/Max. Am I wrong? I know... but I won't tell ya! OK, then this whole discussion doesn't make any sense. Well zeroed scopes are not an issue - of course if addonmaker would invest some time in drawing his own reticle textures. That's how BI made the BDC work on both M21 and SVD (and WGL also had working BDC reticles). Naturally, when someone (like @anuj in this thread) changes weapon/ammo values and expects them to work flawlessly with pre-existing sight textures, he's in for a bad news. What I'm interested in is ability to change the way projectile behaves, to simulate different weights of bullets. I can't see any way to do that, while you say it is possible via adding one config value, however you don't want to spread the knowledge about that value. OK then, I'm waiting for your monumental addon to be released, so that all of us could learn about that secret formula.

I've searched the forums, but I don't have satisfactory answer... Short version: how are ballistics and terminal ballistics calculated in OFP? What does the "hit" value and "(min/mid/max)Range" (CfgAmmo), and initSpeed, maxSpeed (CfgWeapons), and are there any links between them? Long version: I'm making config for Silent War mod weapons pack, and I've looked into JAM3 values. What hit me was that JAM's 9x19 NATO, and 9x18 Makarov have the same hit value: 6.5 (JAM_Pistol_Bullet). That's kind of surprising because terminal ballistics of Makarov cartridge are more similiar to the .380 ACP, not 9mm Luger. Then, in CfgWeapons section, initSpeed for 9mm is set to 457, while Makarov value is 323. I learned that initSpeed in OFP affects only bullet trajectory. But what with "Range" values set for bullet? Again JAM's Luger and Mak use the same JAM_Pistol_Bullet class. And in real life ballistics of both cartridges are more-less identical (difference is only when it comes to terminal ballistics). So, that makes me think that initSpeed value can also have effect on the damage the bullet makes... Or maybe JAM guys were only wrong? I've got basic data for both cartridges (projectile weight, speed at muzzle, energy at muzzle, effective range etc.) - how I can "compute" them into "OFP-friendly" values? Also: how is rate of fire calculated? What I can see in game config looks nowhere near the real data. Thanks in advance!

Rabbit Hunt Mission by Krzychuzokecia A simple mission utilizing ideas from CSJ's original Rabbit Season. Your task is to hunt as much rabbits as You can, but You'll fail if You won't get at least 15 of them. Be warned: rabbits are fast runners, so take Your time and don't waste ammo! Credits: CSJ - original idea and rabbits' movement script Kzo - mission. Requirements: - Sanctuary's WW4 Modpack 2.5 + updates - Kenoxite's WW4 Extended 1.0 - Kenoxite's WW4 Extended - Cold War 1.0 - Kenoxite's WW4 Extended - Arctic 1.2 + requirements (Kegety's Winter Nogojev 1.1) - CSJ Rabbit addon. Link to download: v 1.01. Older versions: 1.0 (requires JAM3).

You're a little bit late You mean already existing config value? Or are you daydreaming? There's airFriction in Arma 1 CfgAmmo used, however for OFP there's no equivalent that I know of (only sideAirFriction for guided missiles). Once again - I wrote about it in previous post. Since there will be no updates for CWA (1.99 was rather a happy incident - from my understanding BI guys simply had no 1.96 master and thus we got an update), we have to work withing existing constraints.

It doesn't work for me either. If @zulu1 doesn't have it, then we're screwed because my HDD died early in 2017.

The rucksack itself is a weapon IIRC. I'll check it all out in the next two weeks, sorry, I'm kinda busy

Obviously it wasn't I who made the rucksack scripts, and it's been more than a year since I've lost my EXT data/notes/buglists etc. but I seem to recall that there indeed was an issue with AI and rucksacks in general. I'm not a scripter like @kenoxite but I'll at least look into this, and confirm if it's indeed a bug.

distanceZoomMax and distanceZoomMin. However I'm not sure if the number is in meters or not - I remember having few discrepancies here and there. But basic system works. Nevertheless, don't expect to have working reticles, especially M21 - it's set to work at exact magnification. Unless you plan to draw them by hand, but I doubt it. The biggest issue of proper ballistics (and thus working realistic reticles) is that every bullet uses the same ballistic coefficent (there's only sideAirFriction for guided missiles). So they slow down at the same pace, which sucks when you have different weights of bullest (light and fast 5.56/5.45 and heavier, slower 7.62x39). So you got to mess with initSpeed and zero ranges to have a believable trajectory.

I've listed some of the tutorials here. Brsseb and Fab tutorials are a must read f you want to use Oxygen (BI proprietary 3D modelling software).