Tanks with two guns firing at the same time

[Mr_Shady]

Hey all, my first new thread on the new forums!

Please see the 'Animals' thread elsewhere on the board, and tell me what you think of my idea on a workaround for the "no more than one gun firing at one time on vehicles" problem.

Or don't.

Whatever.

Your choice.

I guess.

OK I'll shut up now  

[Messiah]

its impossible to have 2 seperate weaponf firing at the same time in OFP:

i.e SABOT and MG

you can have 2 weaponf of the same type firing, like FFAR pods on a chopper, or 2 M2's on the PBR - but u may notice it only fires 1 line of bullets, because the OFP engine cannot support it.

[Mr_Shady]

ahahaha, that's the deviously ingenious part.... mwhahaha etc.

If you've read the bit i wrote in the Animals thread, unless i made it really confusing and dumb, you'd realise that the tank itself would only be firing one weapon at a time, whereas the commander's cupola, which is a separate entity being carried by the tank, would be firing also, so the tank is still complying with the engine restrictions whilst enjoying the extra firepower.

Or something.

[PunkerSXDX]

Yeah but I think you would have the same problem, but If your guy didn't have to explaine the position and side of every object around you it would be easyer, IE Commander: 12oclock, BMP 100, 2oclock T72 50, 1oclock t80 50, 11oclock BMP2 Ripping Me to Shredds, (up on the top) YOU ARE DEAD!, FIRE!!!, Cannot Fire,   ERRRRRR!!!!!!!!!

[KTottE]

Still, it would not work. Not how you'd want it anyway.

The moveInCargo thing is out of the question, since cargo-ed (any person inside a vehicle really) people can't shoot with their personal weapons.
So let's just drop that bit.

If you were to create a tank with the cupola bit removed, as a separate unit which would be setpos-ed onto the tank, that tank would only be usable by the player, and only if the mission designer feels like it's worth it.
Even if you got past some errors in just creating the models, you'd still have to create a complete version of the tank for when the AI should be driving it.
And chances are it will look horrible with the cupola actually separated from the tank, moving around and so on.

And since this would mean a big change to the engines code, BIS will not make a patch/upgrade which will add this feature to OFP.
I think that we will just have to suck it up, and get on with our lifes.

[Mr_Shady]

Oh well, I guess that's that then. I tried. I think people don't have to be so acerbic about someone trying to achieve something, though. Even if they are only trying to get something to happen in a game.

But surely the engine restrictions highlight how rushed Flashpoint is, even though it is very impressive. For a game that can simulate most aspects of modern combat over an entire island, there are some really odd problems, like not enough inventory spaces and soldiers being unable to swim.

OK, well I'm off to massacre a herd of newbies with an M60 until I think of something that can be done.  

[PunkerSXDX]

Yeah there are lots of Probs with the game? Like will my Guy ever Shut up about the Guy that's 50meters away that I see and is already Dead, How do you turn him off?

[Messiah]

the swimming thing is because they way the world work in ofp - plus bis wanted to keep the action to the island - thats why they make an island

pre release shots (1997) did show a M2 on top of the Abrams but i guess they decided to rmeove it.... maybe another day... OFP2 will be released - no date yet - and not for a long time - but thats supposed to basically give us what was mssiing

:thumbsup:

[Mr_Shady]

OFP seems very rushed compared to many contemporary games. But that's the problem with developing your own engine, I guess. Sure, you can drive a tractor across an island with no loading pauses, but it never feels as polished as say, Medal Of Honour on the PC. But MOH uses the Quake III engine so therefore all the legwork was done for the developers, really, since ID had made such a polished engine.

And this is by no means a dig at BIS, as they have let us have plenty of freebies for the game (unless you bought the Gold version or you count Res), but shouldn't the developers have some part in furthering the game, rather than throwing a development tool at a few lucky individuals and saying, "OK, go and make stuff." The fact that WRPEdit was released by a fan before Visitor (the official program that does the same job) was shows how slow they're being about this. Then again, this is one of the more creative communities thanks to the lack of official hand-holding. And the engine is, for all the problems and restrictions, quite flexible. I made a mission where you have to transport a VIP party through Kolgujev in a Chinook, with no weapons bar the .50 MG through a dense AAA net... then that afternoon I made a massed airborne invasion of Nogovo. Well, a massed invasion by BlackOps, as i can't recall the command for setting a soldier as the parachute "passenger."

Well, that's what I think.  

[Denwad]

1997-2001 I don't think OFP was rushed one bit...

[Messiah]

it was - admitted by BIS - they rushed the final code - at the end - so in that sense it was rushed - although waiting from 1997 to 2001 - jeeze i couldnt wait  

[Vyper]

I heard somewhere it might just be possible to trick the game engine into believing it only had one weapon when there were infact two.

This could only be done with say, dual miniguns or other dual weapons.

Call the guns the same thing, so (i don't know config speak so bare with me) Minigunleftside.....then you would usually call the other one minigunrightside.  This idea (it could have been select this i don't know) was to call them both minigunleftside. So both would fire thinking it was the same thing.

Could this work?

Vyper

[KTottE]

Well, if both guns were named MinigunLeftside they would both fire when "Minigun" was selected as a weapon.
That would suck.
That's, of course, assuming the technique would work.

And you still wouldn't be able to have two gunners positions.
Let's take a chopper for example.
If you have two M-60's on each side, you would still only be able to man one of them.
You can only have one gunner proxy.

[SHOT@RUSIANS]

There is a tank that has two barrels called the mammoth tank 4 ofp well it doesn't do it at the same time but very close timing and it also has the stinger missiles ( a true C&C tank)

[Mark McGrath]

Did you know the mammoth tank was actually in design in Russia.  It was going to be built so it could punch through reactive armor more easily and also do some kick ass artilery.  Just think 4 of those would equal 8 artilery pieces.  Designed also included anti air missle system however the project fell through before it ever started.