Tsark

I hadn' t tried the Accupoint before saying that the crashes were probably caused the keeping the old ASDGJR compatibility PBO, my apologies. RobertHammer, i' d also like to report that it' s possible to use the NVGs while aiming through the ACOGs. I haven' t checked the 3d versions, but i can affirm that on the TA31 2d, the TA31RMR 2d ans the TA31RMR tan 2d it is possible to use the NVGs while aiming with the scope. I' m pretty sure it' s the case for all ACOGs, but i haven' t checked yet. That would be great! Uhm, These aren' t just a "more modern" iteration of the HK416, these HK416s are tricked out in ways that are very unit specific (I believe that these are DEVGRU or Delta 416s right?) If Robert Hammer wish to include 416s tricked out along those lines in his pack i have no say it' s obviously his pack, and even if i had a say i would be all for it, i' m all for more variety, but when it comes to the "generic" HK416s that we have now,i really hope that the stock will be changed to the factory one, tons of people from all around the world use HK416s with the factory stock most of the time and equiping a non US character with a crane stock just looks weird. A truly more modern iteration of the HK416 would be the HK416A5. Oh and about the actual sounds, i like them and i can' t wait for the DragonFyre config.:)

Thanks heaps man.:cool:

Ow man i didn' t knew that you were working off requests, should' ve read the thread more carefully, and i generally shy away from making blatant requests because quite often the answer, most of the time rightfully so is "why don' t you do it yourself?" Well, since that is cleared up, the kind of patches that i' d like to see made are unit specific patches, the kind that can give a bit of "soul" to a unit in a mission, to reinforce immersion. Things like that: http://www.passionmilitaria.com/t24116p240-patch-francais-afghanistan for example, both SF and conventionnal troops patches. Oh and also one patch that i' d really like to see made is this french IR flag: http://www.multicam-inside.fr/forum/uploads/gallery/album_84/sml_gallery_928_84_1149.jpg So yeah i don' t really have anything in mind, i' d be happy if you just include a few French patches that you find good looking!

Hi again RobertHammer, absolutely fantastic pack. I just wanted to mention that the acog ta01 tan and it' s 2d version actually display the black model. I' m also getting the same bug that Sorken mentionned on the other thread, on all the eotechs: Other than that, i' ve got nothing but love for this pack. As pretty much everybody else mentionned before, i can' t wait for the future version making use of MRT, and i hope that with that possibility we will have combos of your Surefire/Peq15/Peq2 tailored to fit on specific models of your weapons, such as one for the M4s and one for the HK416s for example. Great work once again. EDIT: Oh yeah, i completely forgot to mention that many scope back up sights, on the acogs for example, still have the Arma2 FOV/zoom levels (slight zooming in when pressing right click once to look trough the sights instead of keeping the same FOV as in Arma3, and higher zoom level wheen using "zoom temporary" compared to your Eotechs, Aimpoints, ironsights etc or the vanilla Arma3 settings). Not sure if it' s done on purpose or if it' s an oversight, thought i' d mention it.

To all the people getting crashes, i'm not running the old ASDG compatibility pbo and i haven' t had any crash, so this is probably the reason. RobertHammer, thank you so much for releasing this update! This update was by far my most awaited mod release, and it looks great. I only have one very tiny gripe: It would seem that the barrel of the HK416 D145RS is a very tiny bit too short, like by half a centimeter or so compared to what it should be. I know that the handguard and front sight on a 416 cover a bigger part of the barrel compared to an M4, and as such a shorter section of the barrel is exposed, but if you open the virtual arsenal, and switch back and forth between one of your M4s and the 416 D145RS you will see that the barrel on the 416 is indeed a bit shorter, looking at the ejection port or the rear of the receiver on both weapons as a weapon placement reference point. I' m obviously not using the rear of the stock as a placement reference point since it is extended on the m4 and collapsed on the 416, in addition to not being the same model. Any chance this could be corrected in a future release? This is bugging me a bit, but hey i'm obsessive when it comes to AR barrel lenghts.:p Talking about stocks, will the crane stock be replaced by the prober HK stock in the future? It would make the 416s more "internationnal", and it seems weird to see them with a crane stock, especially since you almost have the right stock for them on the IAR. Last question, will the 416s have their flip up rear sights in the future, instead of the old school HK style rear sight? Sorry to be bugging you so much RH, but this is because i' m such a fan of your work since so many years now, it has a perverse effect and makes you want more and more... But really the last update is fantastic and i' m having tremendous fun playing with it since yesterday. Thanks again!

Ooww that' s a shame, maybe the RHS team could share their lovely m320 model? The camo variants never got released for Arma2.

War_lord, you must have misread me, i only said that i saw pictures of a desert camo version of RobertHammer' s Arma2 HK416, not that it was ever included in the pack. It was a screen on an ureleased desert camo variant, and iirc that screen was posted by Sabre. And remembering that i wondered why it wouldn' t fit? Unless RH is actually using brand new models for these 416s but franly imo the models from the Arma2 HK416 pack looked absolutely great. Edit: Found it. I was talking about this picture: http://s4.photobucket.com/user/sabretron/media/arma2oa2011-01-1314-51-00-37.jpg.html and i found it there: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?101332-RH-wip-thread/page24 Re-Reading those pages, apparently RobertHammer himself also made some camo variants back in the day.

I know, it just goes under so many names when mounted on a 416, "HK AG-C", "HK AG416", etc, that i wasn' t really sure how to call it. M320 is the US Military designation as you certainly know. The reason i mentionned that is that on the Arma2 version of the pack, the gl versions had an AG36 mounted underneath, that had been scaled down to make up for the longer barrel, it looked a bit weird. I sure as hell wasn' t asking for an m203 to be mounted on a 416. About the desert texture, i' am absolutely sure that it was the 416 from Robert Hammer' s pack, i think that the retexture was made by Sabre but i' m not sure about that.

Ow that' s too bad, i remember seeing pictures of one of your HK416 in desert camo years ago in the Arma2 times, i think that the texture was done by Sabre and it looked great, what happened to that? And i' m sorry to poke you again with that question, but will there be HK416' s gl versions and if so, will they use AG36 grenade launcher model with the longer barrel like in Arma2 or the more correct grenade launcher for the 416 with the shorter barrel? This update is by far my most awaited mod:eek:,and those SR25 looked awesome.

Best of luck with your different projects RKSL team, it' s great to see you guys still rocking in the Arma3 engine. I'm especially excited about the Island, i don' t remember having tried any island by the RKSL team in the previous games but i know that you settle for nothing less than quality so i can not wait to see more of it, and i know that the "plane guys" i play with feel the same about your planes.

I have to admit that i' m a bit saddened by the fact that there is not a single french patch among those 1300 patches except the "Je suis Charlie" ones, but i have to be objective, awesome pack man. Some of the new morale patches are hilarious.

Hello guys, thanks for the update. AGM is an absolute must have for the guys i play with and i. I noticed something while doing some sniper training with a friend yesterday, it' s that apparently the bullet tracers and impact effects weren' t broadcasted properly to the other players, whice took out a good chunk of the interest a doing a Sniper/Spotter team. I kept seeing his tracer bullet hit low while he hit on target when shooting at around 1500 meters, so i took the rifle and he took the vector and he had the same problem. The weapon used was the G82 from BWmod, so i assume that there is probably no imcompatibility from this end? Sorry if it' s a known issue or a wrongdoing on my part. I believe that uncheking "Disable command menu" on page 4 of AGM options should fix your problem.

Hi, i' m currently trying out this mod and it' s great, the variety is impressive, the textures look great, the a2 imported bits of gear add some variety and as a bonus it' s Alive compatible, well done Leights!

As usual, thank you for your continued work on this great mod Robalo.

DOES_NOT_COMPUTE:eek: Are you kidding man? That' s incredible. I' m gonna give it a go right away, but i know already from the previous version that i' m gonna like it.

Your character never fires from the hip in Arma3. Unless you press 2x ctrl, your weapon is always shouldered in Arma. I do agree with you though that having two different inertia levels between the two states: Weapon shouldered, looking through sights and Weapon shouldered, not looking through sights doesn' t make sense. Once again, since the weapon is up and shouldered in both cases, the difference in time between this action on and smg and on an lmg shouldn' t be much. I fully agree with you though that bringing up a machine gun from a low ready postition should be slower than bringing up an MP5, which is why i' m gonna quote my suggestion from post 589: I forgot to mention at the time that of course left click when in low ready should bring the weapon up, same as c and right click when in low ready should immediately bring sights up. To sum it up with what i proposed people would have been encouraged to keep their weapons in a would be low ready position most of the time, and the transition from the low ready to the high ready position would be swifter with an smg than with an lmg for example. I beg to disagree. I think that free aim makes very close range unsighted shooting overly difficult: A prime example of that is when in Insurgency i stumble upon an ennemy' s back, from sometimes less than one meter away, obviously think that i don' t need sights at such a short distance, start firing only for him to realize that i' m there, turn around and kill me after i emptied half a mag in the wall next to the ennemy. IRL, anybody can hit a human torso 1meter away from him with the first shot, shooting with the weapon shouldered without looking through sights or even from the hip. Free aim just doesnt feel natural and instinctive. Not to mention that i' m also a TrackIR user which would probably only make the matter worse for Arma. Sounds like a good idea. True, the guys i play with and i never play with crosshairs so it never really came across as a striking issue, it' s just..Weird? Since the weapon is in the same position in both states it should handle the same theorically.

Yeaahh! Thanks for the update man.

Sorry, for the late answer, i was away from home and didn' t had the time to respond earlier. I see that you understand what i mean, regarding a JAM of weapon models. I completely agree with you about CUP in that use: While some of the models, especially the more recent ones that came with OA can pe pretty good (There is one FAL from OA in your FAL pack right?), some others date back to Arma1 and look clearly dated in Arma3, using these as a base would make no sense, like the ARs as you mentionned. I keep hanging on to that dream that one day maybe you will have addon makers who will reach a common agreement about what is the "common" AR15 3d model that they would use as a base, and eventually upgrade over time to adapt to the evolution of engines, so that for example if somebody decides that the A2 pistol grip starts to look a bit sketchy he can improve it, and then share to the others. So that if one addon maker wants to make an m4a1 with a kac RAS, the second one an M4A1 blockII, and the third one a Colt RO727, they could all use the same models and only have to model the rail and gas system on the block II and the handguard and upper receiver on the 727, instead of each making their models from scratch. I of couse realise that this is completely idealistic, for the very valid reasons that you mentionned above. Anyway, i came here to reply to this post and what do i find out? That there is a massive list of updates and a brand new weapon pack out. You really are a Santa Clause to this community.

Hello guys, interesting subject. I' m gonna use this thread as an occasion to invite you to take a look at this issue of mine, that is somewhat related: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=21630 While the core of the issue posted above isn' t about looking through optics, magnifying or not with helmet mounted/ face mounted NVGs, i do mention the subject in this issue and reading this topic reminded me of one thing: What would you guys think of the idea of making so that it takes longer for the sights to be aligned when pressing right click when wearing NVGs compared to when not wearing NVGs? To make it clear, right now you are in "weapon shouldered, not looking through the sights" state, without NVGs, you press right click and it takes X amount of time for your view to switch to the "weapon shouldered, looking trough the sights, sights aligned" state. If you do the same thing with nvgs on your face it will take exactly the same amount of time. What would you think of making it so that it takes for example twice the amount of time to switch from the first state to the second state with NVGs on your face? I' m not military, and i' ve never used NVGs, but what my friends who are soldiers told me was that, while it is possible to aim with the ironsights or reddot/holographic sights with NVGs on your face, it sucks, and that the laser was there for a reason. This would be an attempt to try to replicate it, so i' m interested in your opinions on the matter, especially from those who actually tried to do so irl so they can tell me if it would be a good way to replicate this ingame or not, but everyone feel free to comment of course. If enough people think that this is a good idea i' ll open a ticket.

I know, i was wondering if you tought about including combos of an ir laser such as a peq15 and a flashlight such as a surefire m9xx mounted on the same weapon, with the laser on the top rail and the flashlight on the right rail for example, tailored to fit the proxies of a specific weapon type, such as a scar. In a similar fashion to what RHS has done in their last update, tailored to fit specifically on an M4 or M16. Apparently it' s not in your plans, no worries. I canno' t agree more. I still remember watching a bis preview video of Arma3 well before the game came out, where the guy demonstrating the game said something like "and now with the new attachment system you can make super tactical decisions, like now i' m approching a house, so i remove my laser and i put a flashlight instead"... (facepalm) They could' ve tried to imitate Crysis that they wouldn' t ve done better.

How did i not see that earlier? Congrats LordJarhead, downloading now.

Absolutely fantastic update guys, wonderfull job.

I believe that it' s already been mentionned, but we can see through the peq15s if we look at the face that is attached to the weapon, it is noticeable especially in the virtual arsenal. Of the top of my head i can' t remember if it is the same for the peq2s or not.

Hello Alwarren, big user of your pack here, the eotech g33 mag is my favourite optic in game to this day, although i' m pretty sure that since the inertia update it gives terrible inertia to the weapon it is mounted on. I was wondering, since your pack will make use or the mrt switch function, do you plan on adding lights and ir lasers mounted on the same weapon as attachments, kind of like how RHS has done for the M4s and the M16s in their latest update with their peq15 and surefire combo, but with the proxy positioned correctly for more weapon types, i know that you' re a part of CUP so for examples the SCARs, or more generally HK416?

Hi, RobertHammer is already working on HK416 and M27, HK417 not yet for Arma3 from him, and this post from RobertHammer in his wip thread .leads me to believe that there is at least some kind of acknowledgement between the two addon makers. Which begs me to ask, Toadie, is there some kind of collaboration going on between you and RobertHammer, as in maybe sharing models, sounds, anims...ect? If not, i think it would be great. Which leads me to my next question, which is actually a bit of the same: Since you are part pretty much part of the RHS team right now, will you guys be able to share models and things like that? I think that the RHS M4' and M16' s for examples look absolutely fantastic, and it always bugs me in game when i see two weapons on two different units that look completely different since they are from two different addon makers, while they should be the same weapon. You mentionned making an m4m203 variant for a future version of your pack, and that sounds great, except that if i use it alongside an rhs m4m320 it will look completely different while it should look exactly the same except for the GL model. I belive that it would be nice if some addon makers could reach an agreement for a basic model of a certain weapon, for example an m4, that they would share, and then build the more specialized variant of that weapon that they want to make on that base. For exaple, I noticed that your m4a1 has a free float rail, that way i could use it alongside an RHS m4a1 and the only difference would be the rail system, instead of the whole weapon. Kind of like a JAM of weapon models. I of course realize that if i told an addon maker "these guys who moddelled the same thing that you moddelled did it better, drop your model and use their' s", it would come of as incredibly mean and rude, but since most of the models arent made by you it hope that it will be understood. (Just to make it clear i find your packs to look absolutely fantastic and have them all installed, it' s only that i think that RHS has really outdone themselves with the M4M16s in the latest update, and they make all the other m4 and m16s look bad in comparaison since, same with the RH M4M16pack, you guys used the same m4 base model by the way right?) On and i forgot about that; Happy to hear that you will be including an over the optic view à la ACE2 for the ones that need it, well done.