Jump to content

The website is under maintenance - To keep up to date of the current status, please read more here.  Normal forum functions should resume over the next few weeks.

James

Donating Regulars
  • Content Count

    253
  • Joined

  • Last visited

core_pfieldgroups_2

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

213 profile views
  1. [James/C22 Gunner] also signing up [JClark/C22 Commander]
  2. Same as above, dependant on the date but am interested.
  3. After much deliberation I am voting no again. VPope and Wolfie's posts have summed up my feeling pretty well, and while before I was more willing to accept the result of the vote as I thought I might've been in a much smaller minority with my views regarding maturity. However after seeing more Regulars raise the same concerns, I'd feel much better to have the time to better see Graham prove himself on the server, once he gets his new setup up and running.
  4. Player: Haggerty A3 PID: N/A TS3 ID: 0LU0I59QYuRA49T4JlzwIpgm1Gs= Length: 15 Minute = Minor Disruptions by players that do not know any better/excited/unintentional Reason: Any general behavior that can be seen as childish or immature that is repeated after warned to cease Minor offenses of warning level Processor: James User came into channel and interrupted ongoing conversation. User was moved by Corax from channel for interrupting. User then moved Corax for moving him, when he was in the wrong. I kicked him from the server for acting immaturely, after he joined the channel again I told him to cease as he was in the wrong for interrupting. Then the user reacted aggressively and continued to disrupt conversation and moved Corax once again, leading to this ban.
  5. Oh I am completely aware of what happened, a few regulars were with Cath at the time of this happening. RL takes priority over internet events 100% of the time. I am sympathetic to Graham's reasons for missing the scheduled time and accept that Cath could be quite abrasive at times, however my issue was with his conduct and specifically the reply, when caught out he could have simply accepted that he had committed himself to attending and simply apologise for not being able to, instead the response left much to be desired. I am however choosing to now abstain after talking to Graham, but I will not vote yes at this time.
  6. User has a history of behaving immaturely at slotting/mission selection, often opting to childishly express his preference/dislike of certain mission types. Further to this, I am reminded of an event in which said user blew off a UOTC course he was meant to teach, with no fore warning/apology, and when confronted by a UOTC officer, got very unnecessarily defensive. Voted no. Abstaining.
  7. Nah, some of us remember you. Welcome back!
  8. Firstly, prior bans will always escalate other bans in the same time scale, if you would like to see about them getting removed, you can poll them, here is an example: http://forums.unitedoperations.net/index.php/topic/27581-removal-of-prior-bans-from-kevin31/ As for reasoning behind this ban, you were confronted on the server about the TK, all he was looking for was an explanation into your thinking at the time and most likely an apology, instead he got some snarky response saying "I'm glad I killed you". Most embarrassed users will apologise and give an explanation for their mistakes. An apology would have sufficed and instead this would have been ignored had this been the response you gave, however, instead you showed no regret, not until this ban was posted. I see no reason to remove the ban at this time.
  9. Player: Sir_Mills A3 PID: 2a210097c65ac43fe9fb75c8913d461f TS3 ID: wfaHh4XGMpOCtWuNqgrqwNP/KL4= Length: 24 Hour 48 hours - Minor Disruptions repeated by players that do know better and have been told not to repeat said behaviour. Reason: Negligent Teamkills - Accidental/NegligentProcessor: James Prior Bans: http://forums.unitedoperations.net/index.php/topic/15601-ban-sir-mills/?hl=mills During COTVT39 Hill 179 HC V2 user threw a grenade which ending up killing friendlies. Instead of being apologetic, user gave a snarky remark when confronted about the grenade. As per user reivew thread: http://forums.unitedoperations.net/index.php/topic/19142-sir-mills/page-2
  10. I totally understand this point of view, especially after talking with you yesterday. However, it is uncertain as to when Mondalkb and GalComT will release GM. We could potentially be waiting many, many months before we see any of this. I am willing to commit myself to writing any necessary compatibility configs for said mods should it be required, or even a mothball if we feel that is best if/when it comes to it. If we really wanted to be nitpicky, I could argue that technically the mods released by GM won't be the same anyway, as they are focusing on an earlier period than Redd'n'Tank who are focusing on more contemporary vehicles, for example the Fuchs versions in the two mods are different, GM won't have an infantry transport version, see: https://i.imgur.com/IptN5D8.png. However, this can be considered pretty minor though and I won't shed any tears about picking one over the other if/when it comes to it. With regards to this, as the proposer of the mod, I am willing to maintain the the compatibility config I mentioned to maintain stability in the mod pack with this mod and compatibility with other mods in the pack as I have stated. I do agree we need to be careful about what we add in order to maintain stability, but as discussed last night some of us believe there is a balance to be struck between this and making sure the game doesn't get stale through replaying the same content, especially as ArmA 3 has already outlasted the time spent playing ArmA 2 at UO, and a successor isn't looking likely to be announced soon. If at all possible, this should be avoided. Mods in the past have typically been removed for solid reasons pertaining to issues like no longer functioning as intended or outright breaking. I am not in favour of outright removing and breaking missions when it can be avoided, like stated above, if it came to a situation where we include GM I will make sure they are compatible, or if we feel we can only have one or the other, I will write a mothball patch to allow time for a switch over to happen, as has been done in the past with major mod replacements.
  11. Yes, armour values are correct to real life and do not pose an issue. There was a discrepancy with the Marder's 20mm being a bit strong, but I wrote a separate config patch to make it play nice, as well as to make the MG3 use the same sounds as the one we already have. To note further, if there is wide enough support for this mod expressed here after about a week, I will bring this thread to the GSOs and ask for its addition, failing that I will poll it for addition. Edit: Forgot to also add, everything is ACE/ACRE compatible. Proper German rack radios are configured for the vehicles. The Tampella also uses the ACE mortar system.
  12. Hi all, I'd like to get opinions for adding Redd'n'Tank vehicles, a German Army vehicle mod, to UO mods for the A3 server. It adds 5 new vehicles currently, with a 6th in the works. They are: Marder 1A5 TPz Fuchs 1A4 Mercedes G-Class "Wolf"/"G-Wagen" Flakpanzer Gepard Wiesel 1A2 TOW & Wiesel 1A4 Mk20 The 6th WIP vehicle is a Luchs, a German armoured wheeled recon vehicle. The vehicles included have been used by the Bundeswehr from the 1970s/80s through to the present day, providing content which could be used for a variety of mission settings. We already have basic infantry equipment for the Bundeswehr from the Cold War to the present day, from RHS, Corax and Toadie/NIArms. This is proposing to add vehicles to supplement this gear which were used by standard line and mechanised infantry units in the German Army. Edit: Forgot to also add, everything is ACE/ACRE compatible. Proper German rack radios are configured for the vehicles. The Tampella also uses the ACE mortar system. Edit: Yet another detail I forgot to mention, mod adds a static MILAN ATGM, useful for a variety of settings, not just pertaining to the Bundeswehr, but also the British Armed Forces until the mid 2000s, the French Army until very recently, Peshmerga forces in Iraqi Kudistan, and many others. The following album shows various screenshots of the content I am proposing we add. https://imgur.com/a/ph6CZyd It is licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs CC BY-NC-ND, which allows us to include it in the UO mods folder, so we can have control over updates. Here is a link to the BI forum thread: https://forums.bohemia.net/forums/topic/210296-reddntank-vehicles/ Link to steam workshop page: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1128145626 Edit: To note further, if there is wide enough support for this mod expressed here after about a week, I will bring this thread to the GSOs and ask for its addition, failing that I will poll it for addition.
  13. Actions reported corroborated by Woody. User also unloaded the pilot from the helicopter and attempted to stop players getting to him, leading to Soviet kicking him from the server.
×