Von_Lipwig

You call that physics? :p --- I haven't seen glitches like that for a very long time. I did make about 20 saltos on an ATV (subsequently killing myself) when I drove in a ditch on Proving Grounds but not as extreme as this :p

Some more footage from a game on the Naked Fanatics server last night, an attack on Zelenogorsk meeting stiffer resistance than expected... Attack on Zelenogorsk, part 1: pn4iVaVvxKg Attack on Zelenogorsk, part 2: olWN0TMfdDQ Enjoy!

Some recent footage from some Domination games on the =NF= server. First video: A glorious charge on Berezhino 1JyMFmSwJ4w Second video: Holding our Hill OP IbuYjeNlt2c Might hear some profanity in this video... :p --- Enjoy!

I like that idea; will definitely be great in the long run! :D

Which would be good. Right now the game is a bit of a mess when it comes to uniformity. Would be great if it was done through a big patch but I wouldn't mind it in a dlc either (cause its quite a lot of work). However, for compatibility purposes, a patch might be the only way to go...

This could be done slightly simpler by making the Side and Faction dropdowns in the editor seperate of eachother. That way, you can make everyone you want Opfor or Blufor. One should be able to do this per unit, too. This would enable a mission maker to simulate, for example, the way insurgents and local police/militia are hard to distinguish. In practice, this would mean you would be able to place Takistani Locals, and all of them belonging to different factions. I know it can already be done by assigning a Blufor or Opfor squad elader with a 0% probability of presence, but this is a workaround at best. Would be good if it were actually implemented in the editor.

Received some new information so I added some annotations to my review: Tree collision will be fixed in 1.57, texture issue might also be fixed in 1.57, secondary sights for xm8 are being discussed.

Brief video review/new unit showcase of the PMC DLC. No, it's not professionally made. Yes, it's opinionated. It's meant to give people a brief first glance at it and also to provide a tiny bit of information and links to discussion and more info in the video description (linking back to this forum, in fact ;) ). For those who are interested, enjoy :) UPDATED ANNOTATIONS Yb322nLWgzY

I pretty much exclusively play on our own server, the link to which can be found in my signature :) I think we've assembled a great group of guys there, keeps me coming back for more ;)

Could always take a look at the Naked Fanatics server (filter for Naked, and be honest, who doesn't want to secretly filter for that? ;) ). On normal weekdays we are a bit more loose with rules although we still talk (at least when there's regulars on the server whch there normally are), on weekends we tend to try and have more organised games with more communication and teamwork. Check out my youtube channel to get an image of what our server is like: http://www.youtube.com/user/vonlipwig?feature=mhum :) But there are loads more servers to be honest. Just take a look in the Squads and Fanpages section to see threads for all kinds of communities out there. You can normally assume that the communities who advertise themselves there are more inclined to have proper communication and teamwork going on. :)

Now that would make me commit my life to the ArmA editor. It should be possible because as far as I know both programs run on the same engine, or at least a very similar one. I hope this will be made available to us at some point.

How would one go about creating a petition/ticket for this? I would not want this sinking into the swamp fo forgotten good ideas... Or does a ticket already exist?

Thanks for the answers, I thought it would be quite simple but, again, I have no clue about model editing :)

I would love to have this set up in the editor as well; having it in the game but not available to editors and players seems odd, like a waste of work (why would you make a texture if you're not going to let anyone use it?). If there would be more textures for other units as well, that would make me (and lots of other people I bet) very happy indeed. If only they would be available in the editor, mission makers would have so much more freedom to make missions without the need for community addons (by which I don't mean disrespect to the community addons at all, I just mean to say that without those addons, there is less of a hassle to get into missions that would otherwise need them, ie not having a dependency)

How would putting a backpack on someone's back involve remodelling a lot of units? Isn't it as simple as just putting a backpack on a unit's back? This is not a sarcastic question by the way, I would really like to know because I have no idea what is involved with that; it just seems to me (with no concept of 3D modelling or game modding whatsoever) that if a game developer didn't make it as simple as 'allowbackpack=1', he did something wrong :p To me, the xm8 lacks versatility but that's just personal, nothing against the dlc in that regard. I do hope BIS will do something to fix that oversight so that people who already had the very same weapons (with a lck of extra config I guess) will be able to enjoy at LEAST the textures they used to have before it was ripped from their games by the DLC :p Not buying the DLC should not result in losing something, it should only result in not getting something ;) I also hope that at some point we'll get some DLC or a patch or whatever that will bring up A2 units to OA standards, but I think this hope is in vain. I would love marines/Russians with desert camo but that's probably not to be either. This could very well work in a DLC format because they could make the NEW textures (not the old ones, mind you! :p ) in low-res for non-purchasers as well. But I guess BIS will prefer to concentrate on DLC that has a cool-factor (ie, cool new units with cool weapons and cool vehicles, and a cool but small new map) instead of something that would really enhance the game but that would not yield such cool screenshots and cool videos with bad voice acting ;) After all, a screenshot of a scruffy guy in a T-shirt and headset and a futuristic looking weapon is probably going to bring in more customers than a screenshot of a Russian with a backpack... Sadly.

Yeah, launchers take time to prepare for firing, so you will want to do that in cover and while standing still. I do think drawing your pistol could be at least a little faster, though I can't say this is based on any real-life experience. How fast could one generally draw one's sidearm in combat? And I guess doing it on the move would be a bit cumbersome, so it would naturally take longer, during which time you would not be able to shoot anything as you're just transitioning between weapons. I wonder if it's at all possible to make different transition-speeds for sidearms and launchers both on the move and standing still... if not, then just speeding everything up would be unacceptable, I'd rather have it the way it is now then. However, if the different can be coded in (by means of different animations, perhaps?) then it wouldn't be such a bad change I think. It all depends. :)

Swapping to sidearm (pistol) should be rather quick, but swapping to a launcher should take time. I don't know if it's possible to code in a difference between the two?

Would be very good to have these, definitely! It always kind of bugged me that the M136 takes such a rediculous amount of slots. I'm undecided whether the M136 should be completely confined tot he backpack/launcher slot and have no effect on inventory slots, though, or whether it should just take up less inventory space.

From what I know (and this info might be outdated) the 3D editor can NOT yet be used to create missions that actually work (or at least in a multiplayer environment). Which is a damn shame. If only we had the option in the 2D editor indeed. Then we could preview the mission in-game, but also switch to 3D mode. I would quite probably never leave the editor again, so maybe it's a blessing that it hasn't been put in/fixed yet. :p I think there was a program that could convert missions made in the 3D editor to be compatible with the 2D editor/MP missions for ArmA2, but I don't think this works for Operation Arrowhead (yet).

Many servers run their own modpacks, when you want to play on any server that does not run standard modpacks you will want to sync your addons with that specific server. A good way to go about this is ask in the community that plays on that server, they can point you in the right direction. Some servers also run a few more standardised mods (for example, some may be running just the latest stable version of ACE, which can be downloaded from Armaholic). Other servers don't run any mods at all, or at least no mods that require any client-side addons. This all differs per server and community, so usually it's better to either stick with unmodded server or pick one or two servers/communities to play on/with so you will have less of a hard time syncing up with each! :)

Here's some videos taken on our server, not by me though. :) PvP mission, playtesting Gmjgb5yQhug We (the defenders) took almost all attackers down on their approach... except one, Thorin, who continues to flank us and wreak havoc in our building... Some scenes from Insurgency part 1 - XQC2pzf38ig part 2 - zeEwALMNllo Going for the cache in Zavarak. Long Way to Garmsar lwT-sKfiv-U Same Insurgency game, on the way to Garmsar. Due to someone spawning, we don't fit in the humvee anymore, so someone, no, ALL of us (because we have team spirit! :p ) will have to walk!

Eleven, probably ;) New map looks small but looks promising for small-scale infantry-only (or limited vehicular support) TvT missions. Heightmap looks good and offers some opportunity for flanking and such. I guess it says a lot about BIS that I like what they did but only want MORE of it... :) New (or 'new') weapons aren't that interesting (maybe I'll grow to them) and the character models might be good for a mission or two. I'm sure I'll use at least the chopper and the car looks fun to use at some point. We'll see. :)

You have a fair point there ;) 9 Euros sure isn't much, it's just the principle of the thing. As I said I was not personally "duped". :p I guess it's the logical choice for BIS but it just seems odd to me still. Still looking forward to whatever they decide to release next though. :)

Neopas, I have an important question for you: what server(s) do you (and your group, if applicable) play on? A team member of mine tried several servers and some work and others don't. Do you know what server hosting company hosts the server(s) you get this bug on? EDIT: To anyone experiencing this problem, please contact the server administrators of those servers you encounter the problem on. Manually updating BEserver.dll (the battleye server program) does the trick. Or at least it ddi for us. For us, the problem appears to have disappeared after doing that. :) *crosses fingers*

I agree with you that having correct functions is better than having a good texture.... had it not been for the fact that people did actually already pay for these rifles. No matter which way it is turned, to me it still seems a bit like stealing something from people and then selling it back to them again. They sold it as 'new content' but it is, in fact, old content that's been edited some. I wouldn't even care about that if people who bought A2 could at least have the textures if not the functions. As I said, I don't mind it for myself, I got the DLC. But I can understand why other would feel duped by this. And concerning the non-existig CQB sights: even if the scopes don't really have any sights on them, it would still be good if there was some sort of over-the-scope view that doesn't give you a clear indication of where you're firing but at least provides a step between firing while looking through the scope and firing from the hip.