magnus28

Hey. Was wondering if anyone had though about recreating this historic 19 day battle. Takistan map would be ideal, T-55's are already in game, just would have to add a S'hot Kal model, and add triggers and config. I would love to help with this venture, just have other on going projects, and can't commit to the entire thing by myself.

good idea.. i'll try and contact the mod makers

yes, but I don't suggest playing with files if you don't know what you are doing. cpbo is what I use. you just download it and make a 'copy' of the file you want to unpbo, then put it in a directory that is easy to remember - i.e. C:\1 Then you you move the .pbo file (copy) that you want to explore into C:\1 go start/run type cmd and hit enter once in the C:\1 directory, type cpbo -e (filename).pbo done! to pack it all up cpbo -p (folder name)

appreciate the info. i'm gonna dabble and see what I can come up with.

looks good Pac! Yac, I apologize profusely, and unequivocally. i've been really sick the past 48 hrs, my brain is on screen saver... Update: the rear gunner on stuka NEVER gets tossed out when a human is in that spot, and SOMETIMES ejects when an ai is in the spot... can't figure it out :-(

yak, those files like nice and clean... I unwraped the config.bin under i44_base_w.pbo , and looked under cfgWeapons.hpp and saw all the weapon types. What confused me was the relodTime on the different weapons. For example on the MG42 it says reloadTime 1 (1200/60) on the MG15 it says reloadtime 1 (740/60) these value look to me like it's a formula pointing to 1200 rpm and 740 rpm, however on other weapons like MG34 it just said reloadTime 0.1 and Yak, on your cfg file you have it says MG15 reloadTime 0.06. so what's the deal with the reload time values? Why are they displayed in different formats? Obviously two reload times of 1 aren't the same if a mg42 fires twice as fast as a mg15! Pac, how hard would it be to just assign the Stuka tail gunner to use MG42 static and just up the rof to 1600? Sorry if i'm totally clueless when it comes to scripts. btw, rear gunner doesn't get booted out in BE 2.071 !! super excited about that!

I think it is apparant that the allied side doesn't need any more airpower atm. They have superior fighters/fighter/bombers, and the axis doesn't even have a medium bomber yet! Sure, let's add the halifax, or better yet how about a B-24 Liberator!! Or a Lancaster to help the B-17 to wipe out the entire map, while the Germans sit back and use their tired old BF-109's to hold them off! /end sarcasm ---------- Post added at 04:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:26 PM ---------- on another note, was wondering if any of the I44 mod team could jump on this; I've finished modelling the flak 37 on my stuka variant i've been working on. Just need to texture it pretty much, and i'm starting to work on the back of the plane and get rid of that MG15 in back.... for now, I just want to change the properties of the Gun - as it was assigned to use the 'DSKM' script and fire a slow .50 cal, when properly it should be shooting a fast 7.9mm. I unpbo'd the i44_weapons_mg42.pbo and couldn' find a .cpp file there, or any other reference script which the mg42 properties were in. Basically i'm looking for the appropriate scrip so I can see where it is, and change the properties of the gunner script in the Stuka and decrease the reloadtime, so essentially the mg15 in the back of the plane would fire as if it were a mg 42 instead of a .50cal. anyone know where this file is located? because correct me if i'm wrong, but I just need to change the script on the plane to use the '42 properties instead of the DSKM

sidechat and all that works fine. Used it last night in our CO warfare mission.

Bring Back Su-39 and A10! These are combat staples for ground attack! Also it would be REALLY cool if you could script in fully customizable loadouts. Not just the ability to change bombs/missiles etc, but to outfit each hardpoint with rocket pods, gun pods, drop tanks etc... Currently in Arma 2 hydras/S-8 rockets are fixed and not changeable.

- total understatement! P47 hey? Great another plane to pwn the axis with ! :mad: gj guys :D

Yac- I apologize ;-) I know Gnat a bit.. I talked to him a while back referencing planes... I'll maybe send him a pm to ask him a few questions, as that guy knows a ton - whether it's 3d moddling, or writing script, guys a freakin genius. Pac, thanks for the encouragement! I just am getting my feet wet into 3d moddeling, i'm learning at a fast pace, and i'm motivated. Thank's to the kindness of CSJ, I have a Stuka model to play with and i'm taking my time trying to get the modifications right. I don't think i'm going to go nuts on the detail, as this is my first real project in 3d modelling. What I really am gonna need help with is configuring the new cannon and MG scripts for the new editions. First things first though I need to complete the models, and uv,texture,skin and export it. Then comes the fun stuff trying to learn script, gonna be like learning Algebra all over again :-( so without further adieu, i'm gonna take my leave and i'll update you all on my progress...

Hey Guys, I know 2.6 won't see much difference when it comes to planes, and the same is to be said for vanilla Arma 2 - not an airplane simulation. seems like every time I make any suggestions involving planes, someone says If you want realistic air sim go IL2 or Lock on... Not that anyone said that here ;-). That being said, I noticed an imbalance issue with fighters in this mod. After testing extensively, i've thus come to the following conclusions: Axis planes are vastly handicapped. Not even slightly, but by a HUGE margin. I have spent hours testing each aircraft, I won't bore anyone with all the somantics, rather i'll just get to the meat and potatoes: -20mm Cannon needs to get a total overhaul. in game it shoots very slow and arcs instead of flying straight. next to impossible to shoot allied aircraft with it - even if you wait until you are within 20m of the aircraft the rounds jump over the aircraft and fire too slow to be able to lead properly. Let's look at some specs for this and compare it to the M2 browning that P-51 used: MG 151/20 RoF - 740 rpm Muzzle - 960 m/sec AN/M2 RoF - 750-850 rpm (keep in mind rof was reduced on these aircraft as to not wear out the bore after a few thousand rounds so 750 rpm was more typical of the mustang) Muzzle - 890 m/sec So both guns are close in RoF - having the AN/M2 edging slightly, while the MG151/20 has a noticeably faster muzzle velocity. All in all, the 20mm cannon should fire faster (as in rounds travel at a higher rate of speed) and have approximately the same RoF. in game it is like you are tossing pebbles out the window! Many accounts of WWII Luftwaffe pilots state that the 20mm cannon was their bread and butter, and used almost exclusively to shoot down planes. They would close in very close, and the high velocity shells would tear apart an aircraft with very few rounds. Compare the Axis planes in game to the Spitfire and Hurricane... those browning .303's shred aircraft almost instantly! Granted they had 8 of 'em on board but most RAF pilots complained about the low damage and preferred a couple of hispanos's instead as opposed to 8 .303 machine guns. Given the apparent blistering Rof the spits and the hawks have in the mod, consider the MG 17 and MG 81 and an even higher RoF and fired heavier bullets - even if most BF-109's carried fewer of them. All things considered, I think the damage should be beefed up in the MG-17, and scaled down in the .303's To test all of this I set up a simple mission with each plane fighting an enemy plane in the six o'clock position from a couple hundred meters back. I noted how long it would take each plane to shoot down the other, and took particular note of number of rounds, spread of shot, damage, etc. I noticed the spit and the hawk were clearly in the lead, taking less than 30 seconds to completely down the enemy. The P51 was next, followed shortly by the p-38 at about 40-45 seconds, and the BF 109's were about 1:30 + I heard that Yak was designing/planning to add the FW 190???? If this is true please,please,please can it be the FW 190 A6? 6 x 20mm cannons would definitely even the playing field - especially if the 20mm hispano and MG 151/20 gets fixed. Or dare I say the A-6's were often known to carry 2 20mm and 2 30 mm, !!! sorry, I rambled enough, I know Pac, the few provided the planes... But is it possibly after 2.6 to look into this? AFAIK my clan deadly assassins runs the only dedicated I44 CO server atm, and EVERYONE that comes on the server tells me how much they enjoy the aircraft most of all in the mod. My services are available to help you guys, that being said my priority is working on my current project - Ju 87 G-2, that I hope to see in the mod at a later date! Cheers!

that doesn't help me a bit.. just like saying "you are going to have to edit a script"

hey, not sure if this is the appropriate sub-forum, but here goes. I am making a few modifications to a plane (stuka) from the "few mod". I am changing the tail gunner, and adding a 2nd barrel. The variant i'm making used 2x MG81z 7.92 machine guns. The guns had an insane RoF, 3200 rnds/min! (Just think that an MG-42 averaged 1200-1400, and maxed at 1600 rnds/min). Currently the plane in the mod uses a DSKM single machine gun with a sickeningly slow RoF. So my question is how to change it's rate of fire to around 1600? (each barrel was rated to fire at this) and also add an extra tracer line and program it to maybe fire tracers every 4-5 rounds? thx in advance

couldn't be bothered to waste my time and write tickets. They are already aware of these issues, but for some reason seem to ignore the major ones, and go for the smaller tweaks

take on planes????

agreed, but that doesn't mean that you can't have semi realistic planes right? After all the vehicles are bound by limitations just like aircraft, it's all in the configuration. I never would expect Arma to have realistic plane sim, but new models are welcome, and you could still have a clear picture without clouds in your bomb site, that doesn't mean that other people still wouldn't see clouds

pvp you are right on certain things you posted, but missed the mark on others. A) A10 can target infantry (not lock on to them) in game.. Just look for the small squares around them as you fly around. B) Of course I can waste infantry with rockets - no need to bash my ability as a pilot, AFAIK you never saw me play, therefore have no justification to make such a comment. That being said when there is only 1 or 2 resistance fighters left holding a town, would be nice if you could spot them in a Su-25 the same way you could in an a10. I don't know about you - but I prefer not to waste rockets 'spec firing' a town. C) AFAIK Su25/Su39 is a GROUND ATTACK fighter as well! here look it up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-25 http://www.aviation.ru/Su/25/Su-25.html http://www.hudi.republika.pl/Su-25-1.htm http://warfare.ru/?linkid=1612&catid=256 before you suggest I waste my time and write a ticket, why don't you go back 2 years and look at all the tickets that still have been waiting to get fixed?

Dude, lol because I44 mod is da bomb, and WW2 planes are SICK! i'm sorry, as a hardcore fan as I am with the tiger and panther, nothing beats the thrill of strafing an airfield, or bombing the crap out of a factory! As for the bomb site, it would be easier than you think... you would have to get rid of the clouds, as they are silly to be displayed at such a low altitude, and as thick as pea soup. Than you would have to change the view to a top down pov, with 10x zoom magnification, and add aiming reticles and numbers to the site. The numbers would correspond to the airspeed x altitude, (just would be find to simplify it and leave it at that). as far as hitting the mark, would just take a couple of dozen bombing runs in the mission editor to find out the formula in which the bombs land based on speed and distance. Then add the range scale to the bomb sites and voila you are done! You wouldn't even have to change any of the 3d models, just teleport your view to the site. Of course I would be more than happy to assist in this project, making all the calculations on bomb drop/angle etc.

Hi, No matter what, when playing combined ops, my FPS usually drops to around 14-20 with textures on high, AA on x4, and HDR on very high. If I put everything to normal ansiotropic, aa, object and texture details, etc. I usually can get my fps to average 20-24. If I put 3D resolution to 100% (1920x1080), as well as resolution (1920x1080), and HDR to normal, It usually bumps up my fps by around 10, but then after a minute it usually tapers down to about a +5 gain. (oh by the way this is playing Chernarus warfare) If I play a takistan map, I can usually jack up 3d resolution to 200%, HDR on very high, object detail very high, and AA to 4x. Now I know there are mods out there that reduce vegetation, low grass etc, But i'm looking for a fix without adding mods so I can play on any server. My Specs. AMD 1090T OC -> 4.1 Ghz. ASUS M4A8TD PRO EVGA GTX 570 OC -> 800/1600/2000 G.Skill PIS 160000 4GB 2000 Mhz @ 9-9-9-24 Standard 1.5 GB HD @ 7900 rpm Monitor is SONY 40" 60 Hz @ 1920x1080 (note no fps difference than my Benq 24") So to summarize, -Chernarus Warfare, or Zargabad Life, have to turn almost everything down to normal to achieve 20-30 FPS - Takistan maps, everything mostly High, get about 25-30 FPS. **one final note** There are several settings that I will not change - such as view distance. I usually set it between 3000-4000 in the team menu. This is because I fly alot, and need to spot ground targets from afar. The grid level I usually put down to 1. I also set the view terrain in the graphics menu down to 500 (which doesn't affect the view distance in game). please help boost fps, as with my system, I should be getting way higher than 20+fps!!!

Hey guys, just wondering if anybody is working on bomb sites for the B-17? Or if maybe the Axis will get a medium-heavy bomber like the he-111 or the dornier 217?

wow! Captain Misinformation strikes again! According to you in your previous post I was running the 785g chipset, now my mobo is for office application???? Yeah.. because they want to make sure to give all their employees an FX chipset for the intense graphics they will be running, oh an all the overclocking tools on the motherboard for their personal experimentation right? I think you are one of 2 things Kotov, either 1. incredibly stupid, 2. incredibly sarcastic I vote for number 1.

thanks beagle, any suggestion on what to change the X sensitivity too ? Looking for a reference point to adjust from there. seany, I do hate the drop like a rock effect when you open a map, and such cant believe BI has let that go for so long!

Please stop spreading misinformation and lies, you obviously don't have a clue what you are talking about. My chipset is 785g huh? not 890 fx like I stated? you sure about that? http://www.twentyfour.info/buy.php?c=477303047 now please go away

hey Pac, not sure if this is your area or not, but i've noticed 2 major issues with the stuka in game. I've posted both problems in dev heaven, but thought i'd give you or anyone else a heads up on this issue. #1 When you take off with Stuka, your rear gunner bails at about 100m altitude (whether or not gunner is AI or real person). I've tested this with all versions of the stuka in warfare chernarus. Locking the cockpit does not prevent gunner from getting ejected. I had a friend test with me 3 times, and all 3 times he was ejected from seat at around 100m. #2 When landing stukas, or hitting soft trees at low speed while taking off, the stuka turns almost 90 degrees up on it's nose. unfliping the vehicle does not work, not taxing it, or changing directions. Vehicles trying to right it by gently bumping it, just causes the stuka to burst into flames. seems to be a balancing issue, where instead of shifting the weight of the aircraft to the front wheel, it flips on it's nose with the tail in the air. I've tested this aircraft extensively, with ai, with other people, and by myself. Seems to happen on almost all surfaces, and both problems are 100% reproducible.