berbinator

Hey, I totally understand, and to be honest what you guys have pulled off with just 5 people is incredible! I had no idea your team was so small, i figured you had to have at least 15-20 people from what you have turned out :D. Looking forward to seeing what you guys have in store in future releases

well I posted this over at Invasion 1944, but figured I'd add it here as this seems to get more attention ;P As a lover of military hardware in general and armored combat specifically, the Invasion 1944 mod has intrigued and delighted me. Some of my favorite steel beasts have been brought to life in loving detail at your hands and for that I applaud you! Also, I can tell that a lot of thought has gone into revising the armored system in-game into something much better than the horrific HP pool/damage system from Vanilla Arma/Arma 2. Having said all that, and i really do mean it, you all have done a great job, I will say this. I find that the tank damage mechanics in Invasion 1944 are not at all how I understand and have read them to be from extensive reading and research of armored engagements in WW2. Having read multiple accounts of frontline tankers (all the Panzer Aces books, Tigers in the mud, Unforgettable Men in Unforgettable Times, and many other accounts of armored warfare the average tank in game (with some exceptions) is MUCH too durable. Basically the take-away one gets from reading dozens and dozens of accounts of tank battles is that there are basically 2 things that happen when a tank gets hit by an enemy shell 1) the round doesn't penetrate/bounces 2) the round partially or completely penetrates In situation 1) virtually no damage occurs with the exception being possible spalling, and if it was a very heavy impact in a critical area secondary damage However, situation 2 is what we are interested in and what, I believe your mod does not represent very well. In the second scenario a heavy projectile weighing from 10-25 pounds and sometimes 88mm -105mm in diameter punches through armor at anywhere from 800 to over 1000 meters per second. When this occurs heavy damage almost ALWAYS ensues crippling if not destroying the vehicle. The long and the short of it is that armored duels between tanks of roughly equal parity in firepower and protection (i.e. sherman vs Stug/PzIV or PzIV vs T34) rarely ever went to second and almost never third shots. Direct penetrating hits were virtually always crippling if not lethal. To give an example of how far the armor mechanics are from what was seen in the real world I have personally seen an m5 stuart take FIVE hits at under 50 meters from the eighty eight of a Tiger tank! Note that it took 3 to the lower hull before it was even immobilized and the other 2 through the turret to get the thing to stop shooting. That is simply appalling as there is no way whatsoever that a tank of that size could survive a hit from a gun that would penetrate it through and through destroying everything in its path. Even things like a Firefly needing multiple hits on the rear of a Stug III to disable it, even from point blank range lead to the execution being fundamentally flawed. I am NOT suggesting that every shot should invariably cause a massive ball of flame and destroy the tank instantly. What I am suggesting is that the system be changed from what is currently a drawn out endurance slug-out into a system that more accurately represents the devastating power of WWII Tank weaponry. An excellent example of the closest thing I have EVER found of what I think to be the most accurate representation of WWII tank fighting is Red Orchestra/Darkest Hour Normandy, particularly with the steel beasts mutator :] To sum up this lengthy post. Please don't try to turn this into a hate/rage post....I love this mod and I want to love it even more, and the way you guys could help me do that is outlined above ^ have fun and thanks for all your hard work (if any of the mod members would be interested in knowing more about my sources or some of the stuff I have, I'd be glad to share

Name: Carl Age: 24 Location: South Carolina Mic and Team speak: yes Language: English Roles preferred: Armor Experience: Long time Red Orchestra Tanker, Arma, and now Arma 2 tanker Arma 2 & OA: yes Multiplayer type: primarily Coop but some PvP as well Looking for: I'm looking for a position playing armor, both tanks and IFV's. I would like to play with a squad that effectively uses modern armor tactics (hull down, bounding advance). I'm willing to play IFV's and provide transport and support to mounted and dismounted infantry as well as heavy armor. Primary interest would be playing MBTs.

ok, so i discovered that the issue I was having at first was caused by my primary @ACE folder being inside a folder of the same name (yeah 7 zip does it stupid like that). Anywho, my next problem is this "Addon acex_c_men_gear requires version 1.56 of application" well I have all the latest ACE files downloaded and installed (correctly now). Now I read on the help area that clearing the virtual store can help on some of these issues, but I don't have any Arma files at all in the virtual store on my computer. Just to clarify I'm running Windows 7 and have ARMA CO

ok so I downloaded all the latest files for ACE 1.8, unzipped them, put them in my game directory, but the ACE config in user configs (after unzipping it) popped everything into my command line for the short cut and i'm still getting this error. "Include file x\ace\addons\main\script_macros.hpp not found" seeing as it's ending with .hpp I suspect I'm missing something in the configs... anybody have an idea what I'm doing wrong? Oh, and just to help isolate the problem here is my command line for the shortcut "D:\Bohemia Interactive\arma2OA.exe" -mod=@CBA;@CBA_OA;@ACE;@ACEX;@ACEX_SM;@ACEX_USNavy;@ACEX_RU;@WarFX

thanks manzilla, I'll keep looking, I did a special search along those lines and found nothing.... guess I'll just have to keep looking No dice, really really frustrating, searched for milestones and everything, but none say anything at all about bombs period except to point out that the ACE2 CCIP is broken. Is it just me or does no one really enjoy CAS operations?

Thanks for that, my bad. However, while MMA rearm works admirably :D it doesn't include the various air delivered munitions from ACE2 such as the CBU 97 and 87, GBU 107 etc. which is why I am forced to use EASA.

So, nobody knows how to use the various air to ground munitions of EASA?

Just wondering if anyone has a way to make MMA compatible with ACE2's EASA module. Every time I exchange armaments the missile and bomb cams disappear. Also a tutorial on how to utilize the GPS guided bombs. It says press "6" to use GPS guidance but it just gives me wing-man commands

Just one question, well I take that back, two really. 1) Is it possible to get MMA working with EASA (exchangeable armament system for aircraft)? Whenever I try to load new weapons onto the default aircraft, in this case I have the ACE2 A10, when I place EASA weapons, CBU-87's and 97's etc, then the LGB cam and AGM cam disappear, even if I put back the original armament of LGBs and AGMs 2) and much more importantly, Can anybody either guide me to a tutorial or systematically instruct me on how to use the various cluster bombs in EASA? I've kind of gimmicked with the CBU 87 where I just climb super high and dive bomb with it. While I can get in the general vicinity of where i want it, a better method would be SUPER. And lets not even get started on the CBU 89. Totally hit or miss, it seems as soon as you release it, the munition separates and the bomblets disperse immediately at any altitude. Then if its really high you have about zero chance of having the sub-munitions anywhere near where they were supposed to, and even when you do they don't activate (eg explode stuff) and on the really rare cases where everything goes right and the munitions actually start detonating and hitting stuff, nothing is damaged. Any help would be appreciated

Steve, if your default setup is like mine, and you have a similar keyboard it is bound to a right windows key, which you can reconfigure in your A,C,I,whatever drive:\Bohemia Interactive\userconfig\ace\ace_keys file I rebound mine to caps lock, down at the bottom of the file is an entire keyboard layout (you will want to make sure you get US keyboard layout if that is what you have) put in the correct number for the key you want e.g. 111 or whatever and your other interaction key will be configured

I guess I should have clarified that there was no injury to the crew from the aforementioned hits... as to the inefficacy of Iraqi HEAT rounds vs Soviet that is an excellent point. As regarding the DU RHA equivalent I am inclined to believe that it is versus KE penetrators as they went on to talk about the great density of DU (which would really only be useful to stop kinetic energy penetration.)

@Maturin - That is a very interesting discovery there Maturin, weird. You are definitely right as far as kinetic penetrators losing lethality over range. Generally after 2,800-3k meters kinetic is not going to get you anywhere. While apparently the heat is somehow killing you despite not penetrating (is the heat round defeating the armor?) @King Homer - I agree about highly polarized parties over discussions of very powerful in game vehicles/weapons/stuff/etc :P I remember the debates about what was a true representation of the Tiger Tank and the JS2 in Red Orchestra (a game based of the unreal engine) and one side would say nerf it, the other side would say its too weak! However, Maturins experiment results run counter to real life instances (in a story in the book I referred to in my first post there is an example of a Abrams taking several hits to its frontal arc with heat rounds to no effect.) Also the DU layer alone is estimated to be equivalent to up to 610mm of RHA. And while it maybe around ~590mm you have to take into consideration the angle that a round would be striking it, being generous, maybe 30 degrees... that is a lot of armor. This really only leaves the lower hull which is still around 590mm. So to say that striking from anywhere other than front turret will kill it is hardly the most accurate thing.

it may, but I don't believe the mentioned T-72's carry them, or aren't T72B's as I have never (with or without the ACE2 mod) seen them fire a missile... ever. It was a cannon shot. And while you raise an excellent point that it is about probability, then the probability should be greatly reduced of getting a killing shot (or even penetrating shot) from the front, let alone from that distance.

I would like to raise a question to the ACE team about the Abrams armor protection... or lack thereof I was playing the "Steel Panthers" scenario from OA. I was engaging the wave of enemy T72s from about ~1,800 meters when my tank was destroyed by a fatal hit to my frontal armor.... from a T72.... from 1,800 meters? It was not a ATGM as all the IFV's were already destroyed, and while I was not hull down, heck, I shouldn't need to be if my forward arc is facing them. I'm just wondering if you intend to address this issue. The reality is the Arams especially after the DU upgrade is virtually impervious to enemy (or even friendly) fire from the forward arc and side turret and still extremely well protected from the sides. There are stories of enemy fire from as close as 400 meters failing to do more than put a groove in the forward armor. Also there is the story where several M1's could barely destroy another Abrams stuck in the mud (Tom Clancy's Armored Cav pgs 57-58) If the current damage model is by design and done for purposes of game balance I can understand, (although I disagree :P) And, I am NOT saying make it an invincible uber tank, but I definitely think that it should be made so that frontal shots have very little, if any chance of penetration in order to force side and rear shots... Also susceptibility to damage from IED's (especially VBIEDS) and greater rear/top rear vulnerability is also acceptable. oh and fyi I was running ACE 2 1.5 stable