nkenny

Member
  • Content count

    955
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

50 Excellent

7 Followers

About nkenny

  • Rank
    First Sergeant

core_pfieldgroups_3

  • Interests
    I live here, Really.

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Oslo, Norway
  1. I would just like to offer praise for 3CB weapons, gear, units and vehicles. nopryl.no have been playing with these assets the last few weeks to great enjoyment. Keep up the good work. Your work is definitely being appreciated. -k
  2. LIMA Assault Force by nkenny Version 1.03 Date 28.07.16 Features - Four Missions suitable for six to 32 players. - Mini-Campaign with using Vanilla and Apex assets - Two to three hours playtime per mission - Headless Client support - Playtested on dedicated servers - None, or limited respawn. Addons: - ACE (optional) - ACRE (optional) - TFAR (optional) Blurb: Vanilla Flavour This mission package features commando styled operations utilizing vanilla assets. The last couple of weeks saw the release of Apex, which broke some mods and added many new assets. Being without a mission to play on Tuesday, I made this small four mission campaign. The mission framework will dynamically detect the presence of mods and DLCs and equip soldiers apropriately. Storyline A prototype V-44X Blackfish flying over Altis developed engine trouble and was forced to dump its cargo and make an emergency landing at an improvised airfield. Hostile terrorists captured the crew, seized the airplane and have collected much of the cargo. We follow Task Force LIMAs response. Replayability These missions have randomised elements and feature a tactically challenging environment. As always communities are encouraged to de-pbo and adapt equipment, mods and gear to suit their own play styles. Contains 4 missions: Basics, a warmup area to explore weapons, tactics, and equipment. Operation Assault on 419 Operation Burning Rubber Operation Taste of Cement Operation Ares Revoked Credits: Arma3 and Apex by Bohemia Interactive ACE, ACRE and TFAR by their teams House occupation script by Zenophon SHK Patrol script by Shuko Modified hostage rescue script by Sushi Acknowledgements: Nopryl.no for hosting, playtesting and being a great community Armaholic.com for hosting tons of wonderful missions and addons Alex2k for sound snippets, ideas and commentary The wonderful Arma3 editing and scripting community for countless script tips, tricks and whatnots. Enjoy! Ken Mikkelsen Download: > Link Pictures http://imgur.com/a/QELJt
  3. *Shrug* In my community we usually joke that CSAT seems to be getting all the best gear. I expect this is a concious choice by Bohemia to ensure that the baddies are a bit developed. The katiba is for reasons mentioned earlier in the thread superior on the most common engagement ranges, i.e., short-- but the real killers on the squad level is access to a proper 7.62 MMG. Cross ammunition compatability matters little when so much firepower is lost. Likewise I find the CSAT RPG superior for its flexibility. HE and AT rounds. Fast reloads. Reasonably effective accuracy. It is a great weapon to which bluefor has no or little response. The Marksman DLC again gave CSAT the Navid and NATO the SPMG. One of them is a furious beast, the other fires bullets at a glacial rate of fire. Also in the mechanized department the more traditional equipment available to CSAT is superior. A belted, autocannoned and TITAN bearing IFV with room for eight soldiers. This, alongside its smaller wheeled brother, provide exceptional firepower on the battlefield in a very fast and convenient package. More to the point, its spread of weapons can engage any type of target. The same which cannot be said for their bluefor counterpart. Pointing to differences in autocannon caliber, 20mm, 30mm and 40mm seems of little difference to me. An autocannon is an autocannon as far as most targets are concerned. In the case of hard targets, CSAT can deploy rockets. The NATO tank has a 105mm cannon. I need say little else. All in all, it seems to me that CSAT are better geared for a modern, industrialized, war. Whereas NATO forces seem caught with equipment better suited for Afghan/Iraq styled policing (or at best counter insurgency) style operations. It is no wonder that CSAT tears through the opposition. -k
  4. It is possible to script around this. My recent missions have both vanilla, ACRE and TFAR support. (My gaming community recently moved back to ACRE). I've tended to make ACE optional, but by now, RHS and ACE are industry standards as far as I'm concerned. -k
  5. Like many others have expressed, I too believe that Bohemia has not produced any better campaigns than Flashpoint's CWC. There were many elements that combined to make this the case: The setting, the gameplay, the characters and the authenticity of the scenario, and finally the novelty, i.e., context which CWC was released. I think that the elements of a good campaign can be narrowed to two key points: (1) Leverage the strengths of the Arma engine. (2) Storytelling. Authenticity rather than accuracy. (1) The strengths of the Arma engine has two further sub- components. (i) Arma is a beautiful game which offers unrivalled freedom of movement. It is a great walk-about simulator, and from a tactical stand point, no other first person shooter game I know of offers tactical combat manoeuvres that span kilometers. A good campaign can showcase both the size and quality of the world all while offering challenging game play that employ the vicissitudes of terrain, time of day, and equipment available. ( ii) Along similar lines. To make the gamer involved the world must look lived in. This was the strength of CWC and to a certain extent Arma2. The civilian populace and (especially in CWC) the day to day lives of the soldiers offered charming insight into their situation and provided a very effective settting backdrop for the events of the story. Indeed, getting this right seems more important than having the fog look perfect. Though personal standards for what is acceptable diverge considerably, there are unfortunately no excuses for poor voice acting. Campaigns which fail to leverage the technology of Arma alongside the immersive social/cultural terrain Arma can display are doomed to fail. Attempts to recreate CoD high-energy cutscenes likewise break with the pacing Arma excels at delivering. (2) Trying to capture what good storytelling is, is difficult. I think storytellers should aim to achieve authenticity rather than real world accuracy. By this I mean that trying perfectly simulate real life is not a useful aspect of storytelling-- indeed it may be a mistake(!). Instead, stories with robust internal structures and sensible logic capture our imagination. Look to the plethora of superhero movies and fantasy series to see this in effect. The viewer immerses him- or herself in the rich setting material. In the case of military themed scenarios what accounts for an immersive (authentic) experience may again differ wildly-- but these are challenges every storyteller faces. In other words, tell an internally consistent story with interesting immersive qualities to achieve authenticity. Another aspect of this is telling an effective story. Ones efforts will go to waste when the setting elements become too enigmatic or obscured from the viewers attention. I argue not for against weaving rich story tapestries, I argue in favour of using well known tropes to communicate effectively. Effective stories are also affective-- they capture, alter, hold hostage the mood of the viewer. Finally, once held, the attention must permitted time (and pacing) to develop and reach fruition. Campaigns need not be realistic, but they must tell effective stories with a high degree of internal consistency. Where realism is sought, it is in order to leverage familar tropes and elements both as inspiration and to reinforce the immersive environment within which the story is told. It must be frustrating as a developer to always have your first developments held as the gold standard. While I have a suspicion, though not investigated, that key persons involved in the CWC campaign are no longer with Bohemia-- the differing quality of their early work as compared to the latter is considerable. In short, I have found Bohemias recent attempts at campaign storytelling to be shit. Which is not to say that they are bereft of good designers-- as in particular some of their one-shot scenarios give excellent proof of their abilities! Indeed, some of my favourite examples of good mission design (with the context of the Arma engine) are found in Bohemias own work. The scenario "02 Eye for an eye", in Arma2 is well and truly excellent, capturing perfectly some of the ideas I have presented above. It is a shame that this excellence does not applied to their campaign making. Which leaves us with the current state of Arma campaign and mission design. I do find Arma to be a wonderful COOP game, but is it necessarily the best platform to tell stories along the very popular "four heroes attack the world"-- genre? I believe not. I believe these kinds of stories fail to capture the strengths of the Arma engine and experience. Arma is not cinematic in an action sense, it is cinematic in vistas. Arma gameplay is not high-speed twitch shooting, it is paced-- drawn out-- and tactical. Arma is at its best when it paints an authentic picture within a believable and compelling setting. After discussing the past and present, it is only natural that we look to the future. In fact, Arma has the potential to tell stories of a different size and magnitude than other games. We need not four player hero-coops. We could have 10, 20, 30, platoon level, player campaigns. Campaigns which explore, through a lense of authenticity the visual and cultural (societal) terrain that the Arma engine can give us. One could argue that each new expansion does give the community the tools to make these things-- it is true-- but this is also something Bohemia is uniquely positioned to grasp, enhance and master. Now that would have been a sight to see. I will now start Arma2 to play "Eye for an eye" again. -k
  6. I too would like to use the Arsenal more extensively in my missions. In particular your first note deserves emphasis. I would love an arsenal that permitted white listing with counted limits. Ie,. the ability to add X units of equipment Y to the arsenal. Once removed, they become unavailable. Will check out that mod ImperialAlex, looks interesting. -k
  7. This has me very excited. :) I must say that after having an Arma sabbatical, coming back, RHS has improved the experience dramatically and is continuously adding high quality expansions to both the gameplay and immersive appeal of Arma. Well done!
  8. Thanks Kylania! So, no easy solution. I guess I'll just make due with what I have so far. :) -k
  9. Is it possible to replace the default mission loading screen with a custom one? I want to replace the map, loadingbar, time of day, and all that jazz with a simple black screen with some white text on it-- think quote sized. I have already done some searching, but have failed to wrap my head around the problem. https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Loading_Screens https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/140951-dimensions-for-mp-mission-loading-screen-image/ -k
  10. In regards to the new weapons. Firstly I'm happy to see that the Warhammer 40k, boxed and ridiculously oversized, aesthetic which was adopted for the Marksman DLC has been abandoned. Overall I think the new weapons look well, and the focus on smaller faster calibers will benefit gameplay. Moving on to commenting some specific weapons. The CAR-95 series of weapons look, sound and feel excellent. In fact I would go so far as to say that I wish it would replace the Katiba in CSAT hands wholesale. I would add that it would be nice if the AR version would show whether or not a regular or drum magazine is loaded on the model. In its shadow stand the similar CMR-76 which feels at present kind of pointless, as in lacking in any special unique character. For sure there are no other 6.5x39mm semi-auto-only rifles yet, but why bother? I ask in other words: "What is its military niche?" As others have commented the SPAR-16 family of weapons are wonderful in all regards save one, the gun stock fails to connect with the shoulder-- inconsequential for gameplay, but impossible to ignore once seen. SPAR-16 and 17s come in a good number of variants with nice neutral colour toning. By far my favourite weapon in Arma3. Which leads us to the LIM-85. While I understand wanting to do something different, the dual-rate of fire feature seems woefully missplaced, and if anything, ripe for criticism. If it must be present, and I do commend the visual indicator in terms of showing rapid or slow full-auto, please set the rapid-full-auto as the default setting. Indeed in a jungle environment it is difficult to see what one would want with slow full-auto in the first place. Whilst on the subject, further criticism to some of the design decisions must be directed. I do not really grok or get the weapon selection offered to the bandit forces. As a unit they are carrying the venerable AKM and AK-12 in 7.62x39, the (in the real world) rare AKS-74U in 5.45x39, and finally the LIM-85/M249 in 5.56x45. This seems eclectic and aimless. While I fully appreciate that the bandit forces are haphazardly equipped, it doesn't come across as thematically coherent. While there is an interesting contrast between new and old, this would have been much better emphasised by showing both the modern polymer weapons alongside older in-house-modified. Think: Rail interfaces screwed or home welded to receivers. Flashlights and IR sensors taped on. Oldfashioned wood spraypainted. Essentially the AKM home-upgraded to a modern era. Right now, both it, the AKS-74U, and the RPG-7 simply look out of place. (and not in a good way) On the subject. Shifting the AK-12 caliber from 5.45 to 7.62 seems woefully arbitrary and unnecessary. The weapon itself sounds good, but suffers from ultra-shiny textures. Indeed while speaking of texturing, I am happy to see a good number of variants. My only concern in this regard is that too many Hex, Digital and MTP variants are made, instead of making camo-variants which still look good, but can be applied across a multitude of situations, scenarios and uniform combinations. A good example of this mode of thinking is the Mk14 (camo). A lot of gameplay potential is potentially lost due to illogical equipment. Likewise, I think it is better to avoid weapons which are too black! They tend to look out of place in the hands of the over-camoed soldiers that carry them. Especially when the black weapons are shiny like the AK-12 (and MX black). A good example of a black weapon which is not black is the SDAR and ASP-1 KIR. I greatly appreciate the neutral variants of the different optics. Good job! Finally, the less said about the Type 115 the better. -k
  11. edit: moved to correct topic.
  12. While not really the place for making suggestions, so I shouldn't be encouraging this sort of behavior. 51 - 60mm mortar-- yes, yes yes. Lighter loads More ammunition Less overwhelming gameplay effect on target. Mortars are highly effective, but unfortunately not very sexy, therefore much underestimated weapon systems. -k
  13. The latest few betas has brought an interesting development. As a mission editor, I spend quite a bit of time experimenting with the AI. And as each patch seems to bring adjustments, I have a set of very simple-- rather unscientific-- vanilla scenarios that I run. Two squads, one CSAT the other NATO, facing one another in a heavily wooded area and across an open field. I run the test multiple times. Sometimes taking part as a lowly rifleman, sometimes not. Sometimes with their starting positions reversed. For me it is a feeling-barometer, proving ground, for vanilla AI moreso than anything else. Now the last time I ran this test extensively was a while back. Before the christmas armour update certainly. However with the latest dev version I have seen an interesting change: The previous behaviour was that the NATO squad would win the woodland test and the CSAT squad would dominate the open fields-- something I attributed to CSATs frankly superior weaponry. The winning squad would generally end with three to four squad members surviving. In the latest dev. branch release this behaviour is reversed. Now NATO owns the fields and CSAT dominates close in fighting. Additionally, the winning squad tends to be more survivable, loosing only one to three members-- sometimes none! Finally rates of fire seems to have increased (particularly the NATO squad) and the posture seems generally more aggressive. There are obviously many variables: weapons, armour, terrain, how cover is sought--formations maintained, suppression or Stamina mechanics, my own malleable recollections, etc. I am not interested in pointing any fingers. Just wondering if anyone has experienced something similar over christmas. -k
  14. Fantastic, I absolutely love this terrain! -k
  15. Awesome! Much excite. Can't wait to be done with my exams. -k