Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

progamer

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    2034

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by progamer

  1. Posted

    don't bring up the tactical nukes here, people.

    As some people have already posted, the cargo capacity can be capped via scripting commands. So that means that in a mission you can control how many people you let in the plane. It is better to have an option and not use it than not being able to have it.

    To resume, Sakura Chan. How many new goodies have you added to this bird?

    - Animated FLIR turret

    - PHYSx

    - animated refuelling probe (possibly enabling air refuelling if someone makes an addon).

    - PIP screens

    - copilot

    - animated doors

    - new lighting features (position lights and reflectors, maybe new cockpit lighting)

    - I supose you have added Countermeasures as it is very easy to add them

    Any other feature? Because as it is it is already going to be a blast!!!

    Walking around the inside while it's moving could be a possibility: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?170227-AttachToWithMovement-Walkable-Vehicle-Interriors-and-Exterirors :)

  2. Posted · Edited by ProGamer

    Considering how much you've crapped up my thread about it, no. That would be a dick move 110%. In fact you can't even change it for your personal use. I'll write a script that detects the cargo capacity, and if it isn't 32 it will uninstall A3.

    Sorry, I didn't mean to insult you or anything. :( It was a discussion and one that is over. Your making how you want you want because your putting the time and effort into creating it, testing it, ect...

    I was referring to making a version for the milsim community. I was never going to pass all your hard work off as my own. :( (I have bad people skills)

    If it makes you feel any better, I with Zooloo's permission got the jumping script from his old life mission into a standalone version but still gave him all the credit for the original script. A few French communities use the script now along with a few others.

  3. Posted · Edited by ProGamer

    Is there anyway to control a vehicles friction via scripting commands? Something like setWheelFriction and getWheelFriction?

    The lack of control over friction is what stops, things like ice, sand, rainwater and the VBS3 style turnout maneuvers from becoming reality. And also getting stuck in the mud.

    I know the command surfaceType can be used to determine the name of the surface you are on.

  4. Posted · Edited by ProGamer

    Its okay no one is being rude...a minor issue was discussed...examples cited...a conclusion drawn...options offered. Time to move on
    its an open project so if someone wants to make their own version with 24 seats you are welcome to do so.

    So out of curiosity then, when you release this addon, it would be ok for me to modify it and then release a more realistic version as long as I credit you for the porting and upgrading of the two vehicles?

    (Just want to clarify I am not interpreting this wrong)

  5. Posted · Edited by ProGamer

    just my $0.02 cents worth...just because the V-22 of 2013 can't lift 34 combat loaded infantry doesn't mean in 2035 (which is the year A3 is set) this won't be possible through:

    - better engines

    - stronger blades

    - lighter/stronger alloy used for the fuselage

    - other advancements in technology between 2013 and 2034 (say the year the V22 is built prior to deployment in A3 theatre).

    Lets not limit ourselves to today's technology. This is how BIS wanted to go...so lets go with them. I'm not saying sharks with friggin laser beams but surely there's got to be SOME kind of technological advancement in weaponry, etc between now and then.

    SO...lets make the V22 capable of lifting 34 or even 40 combat loaded infantry. Don't bring 'realism' into this for the sake of gameplay.

    If this was the future they would be using the V-280. And BI hasn't just done that because of their date, all the stuff in game is actually pretty realistic in terms of capacity.

    You don't make a vehicle completely new and better, it would be far more likely that it's used more often because the price tag has come down. Why should we not bring realism into this? Arma is a realistic game and Sakura_Chan has made the MV-22 realistic in all of the other ways he has worked on, so why stop at the soldier capacity?

  6. Posted · Edited by ProGamer

    Wait, what's unrealistic about it? You already said that the Osprey can be loaded to 34 for transit between bases, with the caveat that it would be too heavy for combat loads. Someone else said that weight isn't an issue. So then what is? A rulebook?

    From what I can tell, it's fully possible to load a V-22 to 34 fully equipped troops, even if it isn't the safest. If it's possible, then how is it unrealistic? Should we not have the option to load the aircraft to its FULL capacity, not just its official one?

    If you go back and check, it was discovered that the 34 soldiers was an error on Wikipedia likely from some parts of the military information of the aircraft that could be confusing.

    This is similar to were the mistake comes from: "Soldier capacity 2/24/12" with the 2 referring to pilot and Co-pilot and the 24 referring to the soldiers that the aircraft can fit and 12 referring to the number of soldiers including injured ones that fit inside the aircraft with the litters set up on the medical version.

    The number 34 was a simple mistake the person who added it to Wikipedia made. I have not found any evidence that support the idea of 34 people ever being on the aircraft. Someone posted the maximum weight it can carry a while back but I think that number comes from before fuel weight and other factors come into play.

    ---------- Post added at 07:38 ---------- Previous post was at 07:37 ----------

    Or you could, you know, only ask nicely that 24 people go in?

    What is rude? I thought I worded it kindly?

  7. Posted

    Just curious on a difficultly scale of 1 being a vanilla Arma and 10 being DCS, how difficult is it to fly?

    (My first attempt at flying in DCS and I didn't even make it to the runway without exploding, but I loved the fact that I actually had to learn how to fly and not just instantly be an expert.)

  8. Posted · Edited by ProGamer

    My apologies, not trying to be negative towards anyone here!

    ---------- Post added at 05:14 ---------- Previous post was at 05:11 ----------

    Well, the looks is what I meant, I was blabbing and needed something to blab about, but if any fortresses on my mod there will be more "modernized" things, so they actually look upkept

    You should think of a story throughout time for these castles you are making then, wether the reason they are not damaged is because they are like the ones owned by the royal family in Britain were they are kept pristine.

    If you want modernized forts, you may want to search around on google for some. You may find some military forts built on top of old castles or so etching like that.

    ---------- Post added at 07:26 ---------- Previous post was at 07:25 ----------

    guys, give him a break - he's trying to do something positive and everyone is entitled to their opinion if they've paid for the game.

    We're discussing it with him, not forcing him to do anything. It's his first map, and he doesn't seem upset by the feedback and is in fact engaged in the feedback discussion. Just trying to help him make his map look a little more natural. :)

  9. Posted

    I wasn't saying just Chernarus and I'm definitely not bashing the creators of anything, and I didn't mean for it to come off like that, I just don't think those kinds of things would fit the ArmA 3 "feel".

    It's the terrain feel. Having the map reflect thousands of years of technological and building advancements, and changes. Kinda like how you see modern buildings in a famous city like England but also really old ones. It's kind of hard to explain but it adds to the feeling the terrain just didn't start existing one day but instead was weathered, eroded, buildings rose up and fell throughout its history and empires rose to power and then fell.

  11. Posted

    Also, someone correct me if I am wrong but I think the Arma 2 C-130 is the C-130J super Hercules variant for which information can be found here from the manufacture: http://www.lockheedmartin.ca/us/products/c130/c-130j-variants/c-130j-super-hercules.html

    If that is the wrong variant then there is a list of them here: http://www.lockheedmartin.ca/us/products/c130/c-130j-variants.html

    The links include information about the aircraft and I am pretty sure are 100% credible.

    ---------- Post added at 07:02 ---------- Previous post was at 06:59 ----------

    http://www.air-and-space.com/20070926%20Edwards/DSC_1533%20CV-22B%20165839%20right%20front%20cockpit%20l.jpg

    What¡s that round thing under the refuelling probe? It certainly looks like a FLIR turret to me.

    And doing the same BIS did for copilot seats....

    Theoretically looking at the Independent Heavy Helicopter, there is a gunner proxy in the chopper and it is linked to a turret

    class Turrets : Turrets {
		class CopilotTurret : CopilotTurret {
			gunnerAction = "ChopperHeavy_L_static_H";
			gunnerInAction = "ChopperHeavy_L_static_H";
			memoryPointsGetInGunnerPrecise = "GetIn_Turret";
			gunnerGetInAction = "GetInLow";
			gunnerGetOutAction = "GetOutLow";
			preciseGetInOut = 0;
			GunnerDoor = "door_back_L";
		};
	};

    lol, I thought BI would have done more than just that...

    And I also did correct myself along with links with information about the the FLIR camera for Sakura_Chan to use.

  12. Posted · Edited by ProGamer

    There is an unused screen in the cockpit. You could try to animate the "chin" FLIR turret and add a PIP screen there so the copilot can use optics and move the FLIR camera

    I don't think the Osprey uses a FLIR camera, or does it?

    Why would you need to make a turret though? Surely you could copy the method BI used for Co-pilot seats.

    Edit:

    The US Air Force and US Navy variants are equipped with a Raytheon AN/APQ-186 terrain-following, multimode radar. The helicopter night-vision system is the Raytheon AN/AAQ-16 (V-22) FLIR, which is mounted on the nose. This system contains a 3-5 micron indium antimonide staring focal plane

    Hope this is a credible source without a chance for those Wikipedia mistakes: http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/osprey/ And this is the company that makes the FLIR and more information on the FLIR: http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/aaq27/

    ---------- Post added at 06:42 ---------- Previous post was at 06:38 ----------

    @Sakura_Chan

    I am very glad you have take the time to port these vehicles from Arma 2 but if you really must have your unrealistic 34 seat version, could you please at least have a copy of each variant with the correct 24 seats? I love how you have tried your best to make it realistic, but why stop at the seating?

  15. Posted

    Not as campaign breakers, as immersion breakers. I haven't loaded the campaign.

    Some people like playing games, some people get their kicks from simulations.

    I've already moved to DCS now that the TOH engine isn't being added but Arma3 can't even get rifle scopes half right which is its bread and butter surely? If that makes me hard to take seriously on an Arma forum then there's not much hope is there.

    I know these things take time but BI just seems confused about what they are actually trying to create.

    They took the OFP direction. Best you can hope for is Arma 4 to take the Arma 2 direction.

  16. Posted

    Sometimes I wonder if you have even played the games that you're constantly ranting about.

    I have played Medal of Honor, and did so a lot when it was released. It was made to be "authentic" and to not turn away the Battlefield players.

    ---------- Post added at 01:07 ---------- Previous post was at 01:03 ----------

    Authentic and realistic are the same damn thing.

    Authentic: is not false or copied; genuine; and/or real.

    Realism: interest in or concern for the actual or real, as distinguished from the abstract, speculative, etc.

    They are pretty similar, not sure they mean the same thing though.

  18. Posted

    The whole 34 number just doesn't exist. You can have people sitting on the floor after 24 but it's not going to be close to 34. The 34 number was someone's mistake as some of the military data is confusing.

    There also needs to be things in place like flight model or other stuff that make it very unpractical to fly loaded to the absolute max.

  19. Posted

    I concur, as far as I can tell it's generic type III(+) plate carrier or similar for Nato/AAF. Right now everybody is just guessing as to what kind of plates. Could be the same, could be better. Still just guesswork.

    All we can do is see if it acts somewhat believable and give feedback on that.

    If we knew what the body armor is called in real life, it could make things a lot easier. I'm sure someone have found out what they are called though.

    ---------- Post added at 08:54 ---------- Previous post was at 08:52 ----------

    I seriously doubt that because money. The more advanced ammunition such as OTM or AP costs significantly more today than standard ammunition, and fielding such ammo in mass quantities would be economically unstable (assuming we don't find a magical way of producing ammo much at a fraction of the cost).

    The ammunition is not futuristic. It's current real world ammunition. I know at least a few calibers are Israeli.

  21. Posted · Edited by ProGamer

    BIsim is a completely different company, and one that may want to compete with Arma in the future. It makes perfect sense why they don't copy VBS features to Arma. Two different companies that have different goals, budgets, ect...

    As the BIsim CEO said in the VBS forums, we should ask BI to try to do these things in Arma and not ask for BI to take the code from VBS.

    BIsim got the engine from BI and built onto it, Arma is not VBS lite. It's a different game on version of the engine without those modifications.

  22. Posted · Edited by ProGamer

    Do you honestly think during an extraction the crew chief is going to go 'Sorry guys we have room but that would be against regulations you'll have to wait until we come back.'

    They would have additional aircraft in that situation. If that second aircaft failed, they would have other plans or call of the mission. If you fill it to the max, you could endanger everyone aboard it.

    In Arma I have never seen players be left behind and forgotten about and 99% of the time there are too many transport aircraft for the number of players. (I prefer to fly people around while playing). If everyone doesn't get picked up, no one just leaves them there, the first thing pilots normally do is go back and pick the rest of the people up in the rare case that situations comes up.

  23. Posted · Edited by ProGamer

    Exactly.

    Better to have the capability and remove it if you want to in missions, because it can't be done the other way around. If you don't want to allow the use of all 34 available cargo spots, move ten game logics into the cargo and you're set. Want to carry 34 troops, but the addon is limited to 24? You're stuck.

    The MV-22 is for smaller groups of 24 fully loaded soldiers. If you need more soldiers in MV-22's then bring more than one. Why would you need to carry more than 24 soldiers at weight levels that should be worse than BI's generic levels?

    You have to remember have to remember we have the C-130 for if you want to carry more than 24 players. If only one guy comes to pick people up in an MV-22 on something mission specific like domination, then there's an issue with the amount of pilots. You guys are acting like the MV-22 is the only large transit to the battlefield and that the C-130 doesn't exist and wanting it to do what it is not designed for.

  24. Posted · Edited by ProGamer

    "Oh no! We can carry too many players in our aircraft!", said no one ever. Everyone needs to remember that there must be a focus on useability when making an addon. Restricting cargo loads only sounds good on paper, in actual usage it is much better to have it carry as many as can graphically fit in there. The benifit is that servers/mission makers can CHOOSE whether to use the full capacity or restrict it by filling the extra seats through scripting.

    Would it be possible to have a version that is set to 24 by default of those that are not the best at scripting and I don't think you can restrict individual seats with scripting? There's no usability problems unless you have only a single pilot and in which case can't you go back and pick the rest up?

    It also sounds good on paper to carry as much as possible until you have it crash or get shot down, then you wish you have spread things across more than one aircraft. :)

  25. Posted

    i know this may be impossible, but how about collision lights on the propeller blades, that way they have the blue circle on the propellers at night

    ex.

    http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2630/4214187593_43b9bd40ca.jpg

    Yea! But aren't they green not blue?

    ---------- Post added at 03:40 ---------- Previous post was at 03:37 ----------

    I've been working on this between holidays with family and work, so far I've gotten the seating animations set up, and the units now use the back cargo ramp. All this lighting stuff is possible, but right now I am working on the cargo seating, increasing it to about 34 troops including the loadmaster. 12 units per side on seats, 8 sitting down between them (this would be very tight and uncomfortable IRL), one between the first cargo seat and the bulkhead, one loadmaster on the ramp, a pilot and co-pilot comes to 36 capacity, and there really isn't any extra space. The inside of the Osprey is equivalent to a school bus being about 2 meters wide. I still have to sort the issue of two guys holding hands and another couple are cheek to cheek lol. One thing I was going to do is remove the upper door hatch, I've seen them fly in that configuration. However, if you have the rear ramp down wouldn't that blow a ton of wind in the cabin? I'm also working on the sounds, got some decent samples from youtube.

    The 34 troops capacity is for transit between bases away from the battle and cannot support fully loaded and armed soldiers. The 24 units are far better and more realistic. If you do have a a way for 34 soldiers, they should have to be unarmed without their gear.

×