DiscountAnubis

Yeah, I was thinking that, too, but this fellow would never call a fire mission to begin with, he just started shooting from the get-go. I also tried to see if it was because, perhaps, he considered his targets not to be enough of a threat to justify using the big guns (M119s, in this case), so I first added a few other squads of opposing infantry to the first group of enemies, which did nothing, then I moved them back a bit, which... also did nothing, then I added a few bradleys and disabled setcaptive, which seemed to do it. That's why I figured it was the setcaptive command that was messing with the system, as it seems a little too "clever" of Arma II's AI to be able to consider force size AND call in the requisite artillery for the situation. 'Course, I've been surprised by the AI before, so... maybe it has something to do with the types of enemies the FO is facing? Like, maybe they won't call in cannons and rockets if they're up against just infantry? I'm running ASR AI Skills and DAP's wounding scripts, mind you, but I don't see how either could interfere, since it's rather clear to me that the FO is not exactly hesitant about calling in strikes. (He's just not quite as... generous with them as I'd have thought.) In fact, with what you've said, I'd imagine the added view distance and engagement ranges would be helpful for an AI spotter. Ah, good, good. I just worry that I come off that way sometimes. Having conversations through the web can be a pain like that. And, I'm really glad to hear that! I can't promise I'm one of the "think outside the box" sorts, as my editor usage is pretty much limited to quick skirmishes and photo shoots, but if there's anything I can do about a game, it's over-analyze! EDIT- Ah- Well, three observations; One, it seems like one of my biggest problems was simply range. These guns are VERY finicky about where you put 'em, so... I can see why you put that warning in about it. I think my problem is that I have no way to gauge their range from their target besides tweaking and tweaking their placement until they're right where they should be. The second, I was wrong about target composition, with ranging and the setcaptive thing sorted, these guys are almost TOO eager to fire... not that I'm complaining! Let the rounds fill the sky! *Ahem* Anywho, thirdly, I played with the MLRS (no tries with the Grad, yet) and... yeah, the dispersion is a bit wide, so much so that I had friendly troops roughly 200-300 meters away being wounded and killed by the barrage. I don't think any sane commander would allow a fire mission from such a powerful weapon at ranges like that, mind you, but if you were to make the accuracy any tighter, then it would probably be WAY too powerful, even against a maneuvering enemy. I know it's up to the mission-maker to decide if such a damaging asset is even brought into play, but from what I can tell, there's a pretty equal number of upsides and downsides to the current dispersion values.

Well, see, what I kept observing was that the spotter would engage targets with his actual weapons instead of calling on artillery in some situations; from what I could gather, the only time he would call upon the big guns was when said targets were firing back, otherwise, he'd just keep happily slinging lead their way. (That, or the dumb bloke would stand there with his binocs while 5.56 rounds turned him into swiss cheese. Lost a lot of good spotters that way...) Though, I think I got that particular bit figured out- I had set the FO as "Setcaptive true" for my initial tests, so that might have interfered with my results. When it was off, he called in strikes, so I think any problems on my part are just testing woes; functionally speaking, the module seems to work very well. Haven't tested with MLRS's, yet, but I'll let you know if anything pops up. Also, just in case I'm coming off as nitpicky, here, I'm not trying to be, I just though you'd be interested in hearing some of my personal experiences as input. I'm FAR too in love with this addon to have anything but praise! :D

I... see why they called the Humber that. That thing's ugly even by military standards! Also, huh! That's quite the pedigree. I'm rather surprised I didn't know this fellow, the Cougar, and the Mastiff were related. But, then again, my experience is more in the "things with treads and large-bore cannons" department. Thanks for the info!

Ah, that clears up quite a bit of confusion on my part, thanks! Been playing around with this a bit in the interim, the default mortars are great, really surprised me with their savagery on more than one occasion already. One thing that seems to constantly irk me, though, is how I can't for the life of me get the M119 or D30 to act as they should. I place my spotter, sync him up to the battery, put the correct code snippets in the Init line of the module, ["Arty_Type","M119",false]; and ["Arty_Type","D30_RU",false]; Respectively, and make sure they're within the proper range constraints, but they either don't want to fire, or the FO doesn't want to spot. I don't know if this is a problem with the BIS module, or I'm doing something wrong, but have you encountered anything similar in your own testing? I haven't tried it with the MLRS or Grad, either, but they've been a little more... friendly with me, historically, so I don't imagine they're going to be a problem. EDIT- Ah, I think I've got it figured out. For whatever reason, the FO only seems to want to call for artillery if he's directly threatened or overwhelmed by enemy forces. In my case, at least, I think I was expecting the artillery to be employed offensively, when in reality, the AI is such that they choose to call strikes only as a defensive measure. Definitely something interesting to note, though it may just be my particular combo of AI mods that create this behavior.

How DOES the Rid-GUH-BAHK handle? I'm guessing that, since it can be confused with something called a "Pig", it isn't exactly a Lotus through the corners. That said, I'm SO taking it around the Top Gear track when it's released. Come to think of it, I could reasonably guess that the Rid- er- the vehicle is probably meant to serve a role similar to a MRAP, given the slat armor and reinforced windows and the like, but what I don't get is why everyone and their mother seems to be cranking them out. You'd think one ambush-protected vehicle would be enough... or is it meant to fill some other, more mystical role? (Like keeping the defense contractors employed) @DrivingSituation- Oh, we've got plenty of room, yeah. Problem is, everyone and their mother thinks it all belongs to them. Add to it the fact that the Southwest is basically the rest of the country's retirement community, and you've got a royal mess around this time of year.

Oh, wow! I'd been looking for a simple, standalone AI Forward Observer script for a while, now! The fact that this seems so easy to initialize is just icing on the cake! It's a definite download, for sure. I've only got one question- When you say this uses the default BIS Artillery logic, do you mean the one that they created for Arma II, or the "Fire Control Computer" thing they added for BAF? I'd love to use this in messing around with building some missions in I44, for example, but I don't quite know what version of the artillery logics they used, if any. 'Course, since, theoretically, you'd never actually SEE the artillery pieces, I guess I could just use the default ones BIS provides, but... eh, I'm a historical accuracy nut.

I live in Arizona, now, so... yeah, the immigration thing is definitely a hot-button topic, given how our Governor and Sheriff won't shaddap about it. 'Course, I grew up in Los Angeles, so... I might have to disagree about that whole "nicer drivers" thing. A trip along the 405 is usually enough to make a religious man outta you... that, or a corpse. XD But, er, I'll not derail the thread with how scary the drivers can be in the 'States. I don't think it'd be terribly relevant, unless Cleggy intends to add a script that makes the driver of the vehicle speed down the road at 80 miles an hour, talking on his cell phone while cutting other vehicles off without signaling. (Hilarious, yes, but I... don't think it's part of military protocol to do that. .__.)

Well, I can't speak for Darkhorse, but for me, it's partially my innate familiarity with American kit that drives me to learn about other nations' equipment. Yeah, we've got some nifty, unique concepts of our own, but I can only see so many Abrams and Bradleys before I yearn for something fresh and interesting. There's a whole world out there, and I love to see how each nation approaches the facets of modern warfare. It actually can tell you a lot about a nation, how they prioritize their military research and development, you know? Mind you, that's the TL;DR way of saying I like having as many toys in my box as possible. XD Ah, nifty! An armored, boxy truck with a lead-spitter mounted on top of it! If I wasn't currently driving a small, efficient Japanese sedan, I'd buy one in a heartbeat! (Trust me, if you saw how people drive down here, you'd want one, too...) You know, I'm... not actually sure! I'm from California, originally, so I don't even think my state existed back when those distinctions were made. Most people just call me "You Son Of A Bi-" er... Let's just say there's a very... colorful local dialect here in the Southwest.

But... I can spell... .____. *Cough* You know, I think you're slowly turning me into a UK kit fanboy, which is weird, because most everything I've seen fielded by the MoD in the last few years has been pretty horrendously ugl- er- ah... ANYWHO! Very nice vehicle, and a much-needed addition to the standard BAF content. However, being the firepower-happy Yank that I am, I suppose I'll have to ask the obvious- You plannin' on any armed variants?

Because... unlike modern turrets, the turrets in WWII tanks were a lot less technically complex. Think... "dinky hydraulic motors and hand-cranking" less technically complex. Woe betide the unlucky Tiger commander whose hydraulic system went out. Imagine trying to traverse the turret on that thing by hand and under fire. Not fun, I'd imagine.

Very cool! I can't wait to give it a try when 2.6 comes around!

There... are no words. D: I know it isn't going to be, like, a Men of War-style fiery deathsprayer, or a perfect simulation of fire-based doom projection, but the mere idea of a flamethrower makes the ten-year-old pyromaniac in me giggle like a schoolgirl. ...unless, of course, I'm completely missing something, here. When you say "guest appearance by," do you mean they gave it to you guys for the purpose of the video, or that it's going to be a part of the mod? It's nifty that someone's making an M2 either way, mind, but I'm curious.

No problem! Glad I could help.

Put all of your mods into Operation Arrowhead's directory, then go into your Steam library and right-click on Operation Arrowhead. Go to "Properties". From there, you want to find an option to "Set Launch Options". Open that, and add "-mod=WhatevertheNameOfYourCBAandInvasion'44ModFoldersAre" to it, being sure to place a ";" between the names of both folders. Click "Ok" and you should be good to go. I have a Steam copy of the game as well, so trust me when I say I've wrangled with the moronic system in place before.

Yeah, the sounds are a tad problematic with P'85, admittedly, and there's a few bugs to be seen, but for me, the setting has always been interesting, (Cold War gone hot, "Operation Flashpoint/World in Conflict/Red Dawn/Red Storm Rising/Etcetera" sorta scenario, what have you) and thus, well worth the relatively small faults. But, again, there is the Weaponholders pack as well, which only requires Vilas' Western and Eastern weapons packs (both of which are fairly up-to-date and ubiquitous,) and includes said US troops in a few varieties. Far more recently updated than P'85, and the sounds are quite a bit less jarring than vanilla. Beyond that, if you're looking for period US soldiers in period camo and wearing period equipment, there isn't much in the way of choices. I'm just sharing what I know.

Someone has, indeed! What you want is either Project '85, which includes American, Soviet, and even some German and Polish units from the cold war era (All of which are kitted out in era-specific equipment, of course,) or Vilas' Weapon-holders pack for his Eastern and Western weapon packs, which, among other things, includes an assortment of American troops in both woodland BDU and Desert camo from the Gulf War and OIF era, with all the 1990's to early 2000's kit you could reasonably ask for. Both can be found on his personal forums, located here. The Cold War Rearmed demo also offers a few such soldiers as well, and as an added bonus, it's quite the faithful recreation of content from Operation Flashpoint to boot.

Yup. Me again. This is just a few shots I took while messing around with some new releases over the past few weeks. Nothing special, but I felt they were worth sharing. An AH-64D Apache gunship on a low-altitude flyby of FB Phoenix, situated deep within the Korengal Valley. Map used is the exceedingly good Kunar Province by Ebanks. If you haven't checked it out yet, I'd highly recommend you do. It's quite a beauty. Tigerian soldiers on a routine sweep of a village suspected of sheltering anti-government rebels. They, their reskinned BTR-60 and the map, [ADO] Tigeria, are the brainchild of Old Bear, and another addon I hold in extremely high regard. If you're looking for a large, South American-esque terrain with a little bit of everything, Tigeria is one of the finest. If any of you don't get this one, I'd like to point out that that used to be a white Mitsubishi. Even in Arma II, Asian rally cars and their TV-show-host drivers are no match for Her Majesty's finest. (Or, more specifically, the hundreds upon hundreds of rounds of ammunition Her Majesty's finest pumped into the blasted thing. Mmmm... roast Evo...) Also- Map used is Faffindale, North Yorkshire, part of Bushlurker's series of Geotypical Microterrains. A nice little map for faffing about on (pardon the pun,) as demonstrated here.

Haha- Subaru, Mitsubishi, I fear I'm not too familiar with Asian car manufacturers. (Says the guy who drives a 2010 Toyota Yaris) I get the feeling that both would end up the same way when faced with a pack of Jackals and a few hundred rounds of .50 cal, anyways. But now I can test that in a (barely) scientific environment! Thanks kindly!

Really, anything Top Gear has done involving flagrant misuse of military equipment (or otherwise) gets my vote. The Stig as a playable unit, oodles of demolish-able caravans, suspiciously off-road-worthy Opel Kadetts, what have you. Actually, I was going to suggest a white Subaru with which to outrun the British Army, but I'm fairly certain there already is one, isn't there? Gonna have to look into that, see if I can do any better than Clarkson. Given Arma 2's driving AI, though, I have a feeling it wouldn't be quite as... exciting...

Touche, sir. Though, while we're on the subject of requests, may I humbly ask if anyone would be interested in a bright red, turret-less Marauder MRAP? Why, you ask?

Yeah, I get you, there. Development hell is a sad, but all-too-common fate for many projects, no matter how dedicated the community. Ah, well! Plenty of other fish in the sea. Or... mods in the... series of... internet-tubes, whichever expression you prefer.

Really? That's pretty good to hear, 'bout time someone gave the ol' Dragonfly her due!Keeps me from being annoying about it in these sorts of threads, at the very least. :V If I may ask, which mod is planning it? This is the first I've heard of such a thing.

I'm gonna go out on a limb, here, and assume the policy with this mod is going to be the same as it is with PRACS, IE- From a small amount (VERY small amount) of testing alongside ACE, I can't really say that your game will outright break if you use this with it, but if you want full ACE functionality or compatibility... well, I wouldn't get my hopes up. No disrespect to the ACE team, obviously, and if I'm wrong, then I certainly hope I'm corrected, but the historical precedent leads me to believe that ACE compatibility isn't going to happen. EDIT- Ninja'd! Touche, Mr. Gossamer.

Ho... Wha... The... Uh... That is... friggin' BRILLIANT! The sense of depth, the feel... and that BASS! You've got yourself a winner, from the sounds of it. I don't know what sort of techno-wizardry you've pulled off, but it works! I think what I like the most is that each sound is distinct and powerful, but not just loud, you know? There's a nice, working balance between presence and volume, which I don't think I've quite seen in a sound mod of this sort to date. Pardon the terrible, overused, cliche of a phrase, but keep up the good work! (Or else!)

Judging by the radar assembly, I'm guessing... SAM variant? Very neat looking! And it makes sense, too; if the RACS of Arma II are the modernization of the RACS of Arma I, then it stands to reason that they'd have found new uses for the aging LAV-100 and -150's lying around. "Waste not, want not," right?