Xeno426

Does this include an updated Yamato/Musashi? I'd love for all the guns to properly animate, so when they light something up it's properly spectacular. And if possible, it would really be nice to have some LODs on the models. It greatly helps framerates on either lower end systems or when there's lots of units on the mission.

Did you make any changes to the armament on the Etendards? Last I checked, they had some grossly inaccurate loadouts.

The model looks prettier... but it lacks any connectors, it's been given weapons that it could never use (and they're not even set on the model right), doesn't have pilot textures, doesn't actual animate the rotation of the rotors or pull up landing gear when under way, and the high-speed rotor spinning animation isn't centered (so it looks wobbly) and doesn't look very fast. Basically, despite the prettier model, it's quite unpolished. Oh, and it doesn't have any LODs.

I put together a slapdash mod putting in the FIM-43 and Strela-2M using the Stinger and Igla models, respectively. Seem to work fine, but I don't know enough about the internals of the game to know if they are accurate.

Are there any mods adding them in? I know the High Digit SAM mod has the Strela-3, but it doesn't look like that mod has had any further activity for over a year.

Been wondering the same. It currently over-writes the SON-9 and KS-19 units that ED made. I've been using a personally modified one that removes those two units from this mod.

Perfect is the enemy of good. A simple % damage based on distance from the epicenter of the explosion is good enough (perhaps using a generated table to account for different dropoffs depending on munition type and mass), especially when vehicles are little more than sacks of hit points anyway. The fact this simple script is such a massive improvement in gameplay, with so little effort, is proof enough.

Have you looked at the models and scripts of ED units that have such damage states? Or loaded them into ModelViewer to see if the damage arguments are working the same? I know the Chinese vessels have damage states and their scripts are open to view. They also tend to have the damage hull texture split into at least two parts, front and back.

Well, all that would really need to change is the argument references for things (lights, turrets, radar, wires), additional entries for things that now have arguments, and the reference angles for the launchers and radar systems. The rest of the your code won't change. Unless you're adding damage states and editing the model to include damage areas. Then you'd have to change up the GT.DM entries and link the radar and weapons to the appropriate locations.

Well, I managed to get the 1969 Hermes version to fire the new Sea Cat. Still working on the other Hermes carriers. I've got them to have the Sea Cat launchers track, but they don't fire. Hermes69.7z

Oh woops, I forgot to include the wake files. Well, here they are. Just plop them into the shapes folder. Wake files.7z

Hey Joey45, I got the Armed Boat to use the new Sea Cat missiles and gave them proper sounders. Also modified names to match current ED standards, along with unit tags and map class keys. Because I use the new Sea Cat model, the shape and texture files for the Sea Cat V are no longer necesssary and can be removed. One thing I noticed was that on the 4-MG version, the starboard and bow MGs shared the same rotation arguments, as did the stern and port. It's basically impossible to actually have four separate MGs on the boat; you'd have to have two MGs that have two barrels, and figure out how much clipping you want to allow on the beam MGs. It'd be nice if each MG had its own unique center connector, rotation arguments, and gun points. Vessel Armed v1.7z

Might be the source of your problem. Move over to the beta. Half the modules don't even work without being in beta. At the very least, reverting back to the regular version just to create a mission you can use isn't what most people are going to do.

Wait, seriously? Good lord. And they don't even have working sounders. You'd think that after all the time it took us to figure this stuff out, they'd have already got it down pat since they can just bloody well ask ED. I don't think I mentioned it, but I did add that coding to a bunch of ships of yours all the same.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the orientation of the launcher. The RAZBAM ones have the launchers facing forward, both azimuth and elevation, then uses "reference_angle_Z" to make them rest pointing up.

I've got the same mod, and I'm not seeing Sea Darts. You must have some mod screwing with everything.

Do the Sea Cats work?

Bowen? I added a GT.tags entry, added a GT.DisplayNameShort entry, ensured the GT.Name entry lacked spaces and hyphens, added a Sounder file, added an Encyclopedia entry, modified health and rate to be more similar to other frigates, reduced airWeaponDist to reflect actual anti-air range, added country restrictions. With the Iranian boat, I created a new "weapon" that merged the missile system and the gun into a single platform (kinda like the Tunguska or Klinok systems). This allows the cannon and missile to share the same rotation argument more elegantly without the chance that they try to fire at different targets. With all vessels, I added GT.tags to them, added GT.DisplayNameShort, and ensured that all GT.DisplayName reflect the current ED vessel naming trend, i.e. opening all unit names with the unit type followed by the system name. For example, all small vessels have "Boat" and then the unit name, or "Frigate" and then the unit name. Also, all GT.Name entries are modified to remove any hyphens or spaces. This line is actually used to reference the unit in code (such as liveries), and it's usually good practice to avoid hyphens and spaces in those names since those two characters have special consideration in coding. I'm aware that fixing some of these issues are simple but time consuming. I've done model editing myself (mostly in ArmA2, like the Iranian pack), so I can understand that much. I confirmed argument issues by loading the model up in ModelViewer2 to check on them (mostly in an effort to ensure the weapons had appropriate rotation values). It's actually how I discovered the Iranian Patrol Boat issues regarding the launch tube doors. I didn't even know those were animated before, and wanted to use them like the silo doors on the Molniya. Same with the see-through model components. I'll be honest, that's something I never really fixed in the past because it required re-UV mapping sections and that's an absolute pain in the ass. Good to hear about the Oak Hill. The file I uploaded here gives them the RIM-116 rather than the Sea Sparrow, since that's what the ship should have according to Wikipedia (and what the modeled launchers are).

So, I've been modifying some of the ships luas to add things like subcategories, weapon changes (e.g. Oak Hill uses the RIM), name changes to match the current ED naming convention, and attempts to fix sound. I modified the Tarantul ship to have the proper missiles. Unfortunately, the missiles are rotated 90 degrees (not sure why) and don't play the wings unfolding animation. They otherwise function like they should. I gave the 688i some torpedoes, copies of the YU-6 (which is fine, it's a copy of the Mk-48 anyway). They don't work so well, but that's the state of torpedoes in general. Especially given that tracking torpedoes aren't a thing yet. The Oak Hill has an odd issue where the rear RIM turret likes to start spinning in circles and look straight up when it's tracking a target, and thus never fires. I also added wake effects to most of these ships. Hope people find this useful, particularly Admiral189. On the note of bugs, I've come across several. On the Armed Syrian Boat, the download is missing two textures: "forest camo" and "gunmount_d" normal map. Neither of these are included in the download, but the model requests them. Furthermore, the included "glass.dds" breaks IC because it's a filename already used by ED. Model arguments 2 and 4 are also bugged; positive values do not turn it counter-clockwise, but clockwise. As a result, a value of 0.5 (90° turn counter-clockwise) puts the gun at the same position as a turn of -0.5 (-90° turn clockwise). I'm also unsure what the "Armed Syrian Boat_OR.EDM" model version is for. D650 Aquitaine, the missile covers do not have any polygons on the underside, so when the doors open you can see through them. On the LCU-1627, the port prop doesn't spin at the same rate as the starboard one, and in fact reverses at about 0.3 value. On the USS Oak Hill, the two RIM launchers don't have connectors for every launch tube. Arguments 3 (rear CIWS) and 13 (rear starboard MG mount) have the same problem that the miniguns on the Syrian boat have; Argument 3 does not go counter-clockwise when giving a positive value (so the port side can never be covered by it), while Argument 13 is reversed and going to a negative value does not turn it clockwise (so it can only fire into the ship). On the Iranian Patrol Boat, arguments 188 and 189 being separate (instead of being the same animation argument) means it can't be used as either an "open before firing" like the VLS doors on the D650, nor can they both be set to open as part of the alarm state. Furthermore, the inside of the doors are not rendered and are thus see-through. As a personal request, I'd love a version of the LCAC without the tank on it and the ramp doors up. Just empty, like the LCU. Admiral189 Modifications.7z

I've modified the ships to have the full complement of weapons that are represented on the model, including the correct gun (it'll take out carriers in a couple shots). However, most of the shots will appear from the center of the ship or the center of the turret because there's not enough animation arguments and connectors for all the weapons. Whoever has access to the model could potentially add them in; I've added comments describing the naming convention the LUA is using along with the expected ranges of the numbers on connector names to facilitate this. I had to change the entry file to change load order so things worked right. bb_musashi.lua bb_Yamato.lua bb_Yamato_Ammo.lua entry.lua

The ship lacks all the weapon definitions for the weapons the ship has. For instance, the superimposed 15.5cm turrets don't fire anything. Defining weapons in the lua doesn't rely on the model, but it *does* rely on the model for those weapons appearing from anywhere that makes sense. The model lacks rotation and elevation arguments for pretty much all the secondary batteries, including the two superimposed 15.5cm turrets. It also lacks center connectors for those batteries, plus muzzle connectors for a lot of things including the main 18" gun batteries; one turret has only two connectors for the three barrels, and another has only one connector. the rear turret has *no* connectors for the barrels. Or, specifically, many of these connectors exist but are not attached to parts of the model. Instead, they're buried in the model body (see image). It would be nice if all those AA guns and the secondary batteries had proper arguments for movement, and if all the connectors were appropriately added for turret rotation center and barrel fire locations. Bonus for recoil animations. A lot of the 2.5cm guns would probably have to share the same rotation arguments to avoid needing to put in code for all 100+ guns. I'm currently seeing if I can't properly add in the 46cm main guns and 12.7cm guns.

Hmm, anyone else have issues with the Clemenceau being immune to bombs and missiles? Seems to have no collision mesh. Oh, and thanks for the link, @toan. Seems to confirm other stuff I've found about the SEM. Didn't know it could use BAP, though. I'll have to add that.

They work fine, though I seriously doubt the loadouts they've been given. I'm pretty sure weapons heavier than 200kg couldn't be carried on the outboard pylons, only one AS.30L or Exocet was carried (the opposite pylon carrying a fuel tank), and the inboard pylons of the SEM were only used for various countermeasure pods.

FYI, the adjacent fire control radar systems do appear to track targets, but the launcher itself never seems to leave the "stored" vertical state.

Holy <profanity>, a question I asked a decade ago finally answered! Lol. I'm guessing Virgo was searching the same question, came across my thread, and realized even I hadn't been answered. Best part is half that stuff I'd kinda come to similar conclusions about (a decade of growing and learning will do that), but it's nice to hear some confirmation.