scarecrow398

Didn't you start on that nearly 12 months ago? :p

Probably not:

Wrong place mate, try again in the mission section with a bit more detailed info: http://forums.bistudio.com/forumdisplay.php?162-ARMA-3-MISSION-EDITING-amp-SCRIPTING

I assume SPC's? http://i.imgur.com/AA4Uo9I.jpg

Yes, because this is a M132 :D Just trying to make sure I was thinking of the right weapon...

You mean M134? http://i.imgur.com/v1F6S3B.jpg I didn't say they didn't use MRAP's (hell, SOCOM were the first to order RG-33's en mass), I'm saying a lot of the time, speed is advantageous and SOF/unconventional armies usually have the flexibility to attain said speed unlike conventional units.

Yup, it's on there: http://play.withsix.com/arma-3/mods/av-mods

Nice... Very slick, I'm liking this menu design over the A2 one for sure, much more intuitive. Nice that it's taking away a bit more of your situation awareness/FOV too, as it should and is a bit easier to read text wise. Hate to be that guy but how far along do you estimate your progress? and do you currently have anything else do you have in the works that you're willing to show off at the current time? or willing to expand on from the first post?

Yeah, there's a reason Special Operations prefer small plate carriers over vests like the IOTV which cover your neck, shoulders and groin... Hell, the ANA hit less IED's than coalition forces because their budget is so restrictive they just drive off the roads in open HMMWV's than on the roads in MRAPS... Speed and surprise is advantageous, you're not speedy or stealthy in a 3m tall, 22 ton sardine can on the only road or coming out of the water with a 14kg rebreather, 3-4kg vest and all your other ammo and gear. :p Especially when you could just drag a bag along with you and hide your dive gear near your entry/exit point...

Well, you probably wouldn't need a lead belt... and in addition to the rebreather (which isn't nearly as slimline as the Arma 3 model shows) it's probably too cumbersome to move with both on, your best bet is probably to carry your body armor in a bag until you've made it out of the water.

It can't be a coincidence I was watching this at the exact time I opened the thread... http://youtu.be/kHhs0wG4wGs

Works fine for me, if you have a joystick plugged in check your throttle and brake controls something might be conflicting.

Huh, didn't know they canned it, though the REC7 appears to be the same thing with a short stroke piston instead of direct impingement. Though at 2,500 for what's essentially a new upper compared to the $673 for a M4A1 I don't see it going anywhere fast...

As said by RH, 262 rounds make a difference, also in game everything to do with the bullet after it leaves the barrel is done by the magazine, the only thing the rifle changes about the bullet is dispersion. Mk262 rounds are open tip rounds designed to fragment and tear on impact, as such, when they impact with a car windshield or a wall they tend to break up early on their way through, or shortly after while SS109/M855/F1 ball/FMJ (aka standard 5.56mm rounds) rounds are a solid chunk of steel in a copper jacket that has much better penetration abilities (though lower damage done on target). The reason for adoption of 855 was primarily for machinegun use to increase accuracy from the M249/Minimi and had the added bonus of penetrating light body armor at several hundred meters, something which was thought to be important in the 1970's (With the cold war and such), however modern tech and combat operations against unarmored forces (particularly since 2001) have highlighted performance issues with the round, which are mainly the failure to rapidly incapacitate targets when fired from rifles and carbines (which, again, the round wasn't designed for the US went full derp and made it a standard round for the entire militaries 5.56mm weapons for logistical and cost cutting reasons.) Another issue also highlighted was that 5.56mm in general was less effective with intermediate barriers such as walls, glass and vehicles (something quite common during the Iraq war with urban engagements and checkpoints). The Mk262 was an interim solution to these problems (Low reliability of incapacitation and poor performance from short barrels.) however it suffered more so from penetration due to the open tip design. I should highlight that if you have two shooters, both with same rifle and the same ammo, even from the same box, both may see vastly different results with 5.56mm ammo, one may report great results, assuming every bullet is upsetting (Fragmenting/yawing) it will quickly incapacitate, however the other may have no rounds on target upset which will literally cause the same amount of damage as a .22LR round, this is unfortunately true for all 5.56mm rounds, FMJ (855), Open tip (262) or even AP, the round just doesn't upset reliably enough and without reliable upsetting you get decreased wounding effects, you're unlikely to incapacitate and also likely to pass through the combatant and pose a threat to civilians or friendlies... There was a study done a while ago by the National Defense Industrial Association that highlighted these issues and recommended use of either 6.5mm or the 6.8mm SPC cartridge (which, funny enough, had a total R&D budget of $5,000 and was directly fielded with good results from special forces who where apart of the development of the round... compared to the millions spent on other rounds that failed miserably and also offered more consistent performance and better barrier penetration.) over 5.56mm for it's increased penetration, ability to retrofit to existing rifles with a new upper receiver (barrel, firing pin and such) and a new magazine (or even the existing magazine, just with decreased capacity). Oh and would you look at that the MX is in 6.5... I guess BI knew what was coming :P Aaaand this post is longer than I intended, In which case: TL;DR Mk262 fragments early (damage), standard rounds fragment late (penetration), 5.56mm in general is unreliable and the Military should considered a new caliber. Here's a short video that sums up the above with gel and slow motion and car doors (Ignore .50 beowulf, it's a hilariously impractical round which weight a shit ton and kicks like a mule.)

The problems with that is the only two ways you can do that is either by adding a 'turret' to the vehicle, making the co-pilot the gunner and having him permanently looking out the side, the rifle would also be on a pivot point and as with turrets, have no recoil. The other way to do it is by 'attaching' the player to the seat using attachto (like Dsl little birds) which ends up with buggy aiming, inaccuracy and texture issues when the aircraft goes over a certain speed.

Personally my group avoids it due to abuse in the past (Back in A2 there where players who figured out you could carry an M82 and two machine guns plus all the ammo in a rucksack using the presets), the ability to limit VAS's content and also it only being a script which can be added or removed easily rather than making everyone download and install LEA.

IMO, bleeding and pistol safety/holstering would be the two I would see the most use from. Can't recall suppression and surrender from use though with A2 if it was worth it, though suppression has already been done with a flashing screen/breathing.

$35,000USD is what L3 Systems stated at SHOT show this year... not too bad but considering you're going from 40 degrees to 97 degrees FOV and they're paralax free along with running on 4 rechargeable CR123's you can swap out in a few secconds (or two CR123's for two hours (6 volts)). Though the full kit for the average soldier is about 25-30k a little bit too much for the average grunt.

AFAIK to enable bipods it's just a config line under CFGWeapons: class am249_base : Rifle_Long_Base_F { descriptionShort = "M249 Squad automatic weapon"; magazines[] = {"200Rnd_556x45"}; reloadAction = "GestureReloadM200"; handAnim[] = {"OFP2_ManSkeleton", "\A3\weapons_f\Machineguns\M200\data\Anim\M200.rtm"}; cursor = "mg"; cursorAim = "EmptyCursor"; nameSound = "Mgun"; dexterity = 100; [b]tmr_autorest_deployable = 1;[/b] I've ran the above mod both with and without TMR running and have no obvious issues (though I admit I haven't bothered to look through the RPT)

If you go onto the dropbox website you should be able to find and restore the file under the history.

Probably a little different for A-10 pilots compared to the (I assume) PVS-15's you guys wear.

It's because they were a seperate vehicle using attachto, the addon was released before the MLODS were public.

AFAIK Bink had them in game and working but with no FOV change and said in the thread they were going to be apart of this mod, perhaps you should talk to him about it.

Right... my bad, my reading comprehension isn't very good at 3am :p