lumnuon

I perfectly realize that writing this is more than likely a complete waste of time but I will hold out hope. I have created a similar thread on DayZ Server forums. Is there any reason whatsoever for BI seemingly hating IPv6? None of their games support it. For Arma 3 it makes some sense considering its age and lack of further development. For DayZ the age argument also holds true even if it would be nice to see some remaining developer resources being assigned to implement IPv6 support. Lastly for Reforger I can't think of a reason beyond simply noone at BI caring about it? Is it that hard to create game server compatibility with IPv6? The lack of IPv6 support makes it effectively impossible to host a server for an increasing number of users. My own provider flat out refuses to give out IPv4 addresses for regular consumers since last year, even if asked and I am certainly not the only one as evidenced by Arma/Reforger/DayZ related requests for help on numerous tech and game forums.

Release of Version 1.4 Added: -Senkaku Islands 2035 variant with Fiery Cross Reef Airbase

I was wondering if it would be possible to give the Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus ("B_SCBA_01_F") the ability to work underwater instead of it being completely cosmetic it would give divers another choice in terms of rebreathers with the bonus of keeping the vest slot open for combat vests

It is correct the way JD Wang said it. Unlike the official DLC the GM terrain assets are not available to all players. That means you have to own GM to play on costum terrains that use GM structures.

I used the ATLAS LHD (CUP or the new standalone one can be used). Probably worth noting that it really only is a problem when waves are at ~30% or more.

Congratulations for the release 👍 Three things I noticed while playing around with it for a few minutes: 1. The addon seems to have a dependency for the foxhound configured - it obviously works fine without it, I am assuming it´s just a config entry that you forgot to get rid of? 2. When folding the mast, the lights don´t fold with it. This causes the lights to float in the air. 3. The de-beaching option only appears when the LCVP is truly stand-still. On higher incline beaches/welldecks + higher waves this can mean that the option doesn´t appear which in turn can cause you to be permanently stuck without it. A little more movement tolerance for the option to appear would help in that regard imo.

awesome work 👍 A small bug I noticed: the engines and the railings on the outer stairwell of the bridge are lacking collision. Could someone double check and try to reproduce? The see-through doors issue is also something I can still reproduce (although not all dorrs seem to be affected strangely enough).

Considering all that I would probably drop the runway idea. The vanilla Destroyer ship has a helipad that works. Not sure if that requires any specific config entries since I am only familiar with terrain configs but that would seem like a workable route which wouldn´t mess with planes at all.

I mean... just naval jets trying to land on it and failing is still better than jets and cargo planes trying to land on it and failing... Would it at least allow the F-35 to land properly or would that one also try to land in conventional flight and therefore fly off the deck?

As far as I can tell larger airplanes that wouldn´t have enough space on the runway of the USS Freedom reject a landing there. If that assumption is correct and planes can be made to behave similarily on the LHD I don´t see any obvious downsides.

When shooting the ship with handguns you also get the dirt debris. Not really a bug but it would be a fairly simple improvement that doesn´t require much work to change it to a metal impact.

Can´t reproduce the second issue, for what it´s worth. The lower well deck door control panel on the inside works perfectly fine for me.

Noticed that the geometry around the inside of the doors in the hangar is not closed properly. I can make a screenshot if necessary. Edit: You are also missing keys for sever owners as fas as I can tell.

Would maybe make sense to seperate the SLR from the metric FALs since there are some significant differences between the two in form and function. Additionally metric FALs have seen service around the Globe with many different armies and militias while L1A1s are a bit more confined (similar to how you guys have two SCARs in RHSUSAF and RHSSAF now). I obviously understand if that is not possible because of additional modelling/texturing you might have to do. Really just a thought that came to my mind.