Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Earlier
  2. All along the Watchtowe…keeper.

    Very crisp renders... thank you. If you need help with textures...
  3. I’m still grinding away, slow progress with the air weapons pack. Motivation is a bit of a problem this month as I’ve been working some really odd hours and completely lost my regular sleep pattern. And if I am being honest I an really sick of configs and texturing endless missiles and bombs. So, I’ve returned to my first love, modelling. 3D modelling not the catalogue kind. The Rockape swimsuit edition would be truly terrifying. Nobody needs to see that. This week I’m still working on the RPAS (Remotely Piloted Air Systems) aka UAVs. The Reaper is almost done. The first round of testing has brought up some new issues, I have some config tweaks and resolution lods to do before it can be unleashed. Not to mention the issue surrounding the weapons, which brings us back to the dreaded air-weapons pack thats holding almost everything back. So, I’ve jumped onto the unarmed RPAS while I await more feedback from the Test Monkeys. Watchkeeper series of Tactical UAVs These are the Watchkeeper series of Tactical UAVs. Larger than the man portable systems but still smaller than the larger MALE (medium Altitude Long Endurance) systems the TUAV call is typically designed for Artillery spotting and local recce. There are actually two airframes that carry the Watchkeeper programme name: The first was an almost stock model of the Elbit Hermes 450 (H450). Operated by the Royal Artillery, the main differences from the stock model were internal, mostly navigation and targeting system related. Which for the purposes of ArmA make no difference at all. So we get a two-for-one. A British Army Version as well as a RES/OPFOR version too. The second was the Watchkeeper 450 (WK450). This was a redesigned platform made to the UK’s specific requirements. Visually the Watchkeeper differs from the Hermes by having a lower wing and a Synthetic Aperture Radar turret mounted in the front of the airframe and the Optical turret located at the rear behind the main landing gear. There is also a small difference in fuselage diameter and shape. Watchkeeper 450 These are actually renders of the older model. The wingbox has since been replaced with a better and more accurate one. Hermes 450 Watchkeeper 450 flanked by two H450 The Watchkeeper programme was intended to replace the much older and less capable Phoenix Drone system. Officially the Phoenix was said to perform well but its crews christened it the “Bugger off drone” or something more, colourful depending on the mood of the operators. Pheonix and a sometimes a ball of flames In 2006 some of the UKF guys and I went to a British Army Open day at the now demolished Chelsea Barracks. We spent the day geeking out on all the kit. One bit of which was a Phoenix. The crew of which were really helpful and a damn good laugh. They were happy to share stories of driving all over the place looking for missing drones or of irate land owners demanding, “they come and get their toy plane out of his field”. And explaining the unusual recovery methods and situations. eg, 20ft up a tree, in a pond, broken into a thousand pieces etc. It was a bloody good day out. Even if Messiah did lose his camera in the pub after. Launched from the back of a specially adpated truck, the Pheonix had the advantage of operating from unprepared areas close to the battlefront but this was a necessity rather than by design. It simply did not have the range and endurance of modern RPAS. Nor could it land and be turned around quickly. The typical Pheonix operating group was 12-16 men. A launcher, generator trailer, Antenna/Datalink trailer, Command/Operator Shelter Vehicle and at least one or more 110 GS Landrovers or a similar recovery vehicle. 'Landing' was by parachute, which flipped the vehicle upside down to protect the sensor pod. Utilising a frangible hump on the back to protect the airframe on impact. And typically trashing the tail on contact with the ground. In the lucky event of the chute opening properly. Once "landed" the recovery team would have to find the drone, man handle it onto the cradle and partially dis assemble it before returning to the launcher and in very rare circumstances "refurbing" it in the field for its next flight. I've been assured this did not happen very often if at all. You can really see why the Royal Artillery wanted a reliable and modern replacement so badly. The Watchkeeper and the Hermes can operate from semi-prepared strips, roads and flat areas quite easily and unlike the Pheonix can operate for extended periods of time with a range of 300km and endurance of 20+ hours. The amount of deployed equiment is also reduced. Operating typically from airfields or prepared Forward Operating bases both the H450 and WK450 benefit from a simplified supply chain. Each system can be operated from the same command and control shelter. More than one airframe can also operated from the same hub. Maintenance including Spares and repairs are largely modular making in theatre maintenance much easier. The shelters etc will make an appearence in game with the drones themselves. including the other supporting equiment such as the MAGIC ATOL landing system and datalink antennas. The shelters are all modelled and are in the paint shop. I have modelled in the interiors but I need to work out how to make them more of a practical option rather than just set dressing. I may stop short of making the full transit containers for them but the idea is that you will have assets that can be destroyed by opfor that will affect your ability to operate UAVs in your missions. H450 came into limited service in 2007 Watchkeeper, in the guise of the H450 came into limited service in 2007 ending the service life of the Phoenix. During operation in Afghanistan eight British Hermes 450s were lost for various reasons. And as with any new system, the programme has had more than a few bumps along the way. Cost increases, technical problems, Politics, Pilot shortages, poor weather you name it. It caused problems. The cost has grown significantly over time too. A prototype WK450 was also lost at a key point in the project schedule during a very hard landing at Parc Aberporth causing a lot of embarressment and red faces as well as a further delay to an already over running programme. Originally the French government was keen to buy the Watchkeeper, indicating that they would share some of the development costs at the start of the project. This evaporated much like their interest in the HMS Queen Elizabeth variant, PA2 with the UK MoD fronting 100% of the development. Unlike the PA2, they approached the UK MoD again in 2014 with an RFI (Request For Information) only to later select the solely French made SAGEM Patroller. Arguably a more expensive and less capable system. In August of the same year the WK450 became operational and was deployed in Afghanistan for the first time to operate alongside the existing H450 platforms, providing force protection and target cueing for the RAF MQ-9 Reapers as well as mortar and ground based Force Protection units. The Watchkeeper 450 is likely to continue in service for the next 20 years at least. Lesson over for today. Tune in next week for something completely different. Rock
  4. Every time I do one of these “Guess whos” I end up dropping a clue that gives it away. I’m going to have toughen up. I definitely made this one too easy dropping that last hint. Siddy, didn’t know about this aircraft and so asked for a “RKSL history lesson” so here we go… if you aren’t interested there are pretty pictures too. May I present the A-12 Avenger II. This is one of the most controversial and interesting aerospace projects of the last 30 years. It’s one of the few 80’s era Stealth programmes that came out of the Black world and into the White, public view. It’s been the subject of several books and in the Defence Procurement Industry it’s held up as a perfect example of mismanagement. It’s also responsible for ending the careers or more than a few managers, business men, lobbyists and the odd US Senator. A-6E Intruder Replacement Intended to be the replacement for the A-6E Intruder if it had continued into production it would have given the USN a stealthy strike platform to massively exceed the USAF’s F-117A combat capability. The A-12 was a subsonic aircraft capable of carrying internal weapons but unlike the F-117A, the Avenger II was fitted with radar and was capable of air-to-air combat. “Aircraft that never flew” The A-12 has been one of my favourite “Aircraft that never flew” projects for a very long time. Personally, I have always had a soft spot for unique and exotic aircraft. When I worked at Bae Eurofighter my boss gave me a book for my birthday many years ago; “The 5 Billion Dollar Misunderstanding: The Collapse of the Navy's A-12 Stealth Bomber Program” by James Perry Stevenson. The A-12 Programme much like the Nimrod MR4 project and the Nimrod AEW3 before it was marred by spectacular cost over runs, design changes and incredibly bad mismanagement. So much so that the cancellation of the programme resulted in a reform of the US Procurement system and the end of several high-power people from the halls of the Pentagon. Stealthy Strike Platform Carrying a wide variety of ordinance, the A-12 was primarily a subsonic carrier based strike aircraft just like the A-6 it was designed to replace. It was subsonic and had two missile bays intended for Short or Medium Range Air-to-Air missiles and two larger “bomb” bays that could house up to 6000lbs of ordinance on four stations. Two of which were intended for, but not limited to, AMRAAMs. There was also facility to attached two external pylons mainly designed to carry fuel tanks but also capable of carrying 2500lbs of weapons on each station. Giving a max payload of just over 11,000lbs. A-6E Intruder Replacement All up, this wasn’t quite the same punch as the A-6E (18,000lbs) but the A-12 was much Stealthier and therefore able to penetrate further into enemy airspace undetected. Making the Avenger a perfect “First day of War” aircraft capable of exploiting its Anti-Radiation capability to remove the threat of enemy SAMs from the battlefield. The exact same mission the F-117A was designed for. Just as a bit of trivia: The A-12’s cancellation in 1991 led to Lockheed proposing a Navalised F-117 to the USN in 1993 - The design itself being quite a radical difference to the existing F-117A. UAV and UCAVs What makes the Avenger particularly interesting to me is not only the unusual shape of the airframe, but the technology that came from it. If you look carefully you can see the A-12 design influences in later aircraft. There is the also the uncanny similarity to the large number of UAV and UCAVs we are now starting to see come into the light. The design and development work done on the A-12 wasn’t really wasted. It spun off into many other project and most notably the later models of the F-18 series benefitted from the Cockpit design improvements born from the Avenger II project. The composites manufacturing techniques as well as development of new and different Radar Absorbent Materials (RAM) changed the US Aircraft industry permanently. Another point of trivia. The XF-32 JSF contender actually used the same type of structural composites developed for the A-12. Patents for which Boeing acquired when McDonnell Douglas merged with Boeing in 1997. Mockups The A-12 sadly only ever made it to full scale mockup stage. In the age before full scale 3D CAD modelling there were several versions of the cockpits made to help with ergonomics and development and PR. The cost of building a special hanger and creation of these mockups was also a major feature of the subsequent investigation into the Spending. Something McDonnell Douglas were very heavily criticised for. Back to the Games. I made the first A-12 model in the OFP era. And again, in ArmA1 and 2. Resulting in a ‘meh’ model and a complicated mess of scripted weapons bays and poor textures. The older game engines aren’t as friendly as A3 is today. (and A3 isnt *that* friendly). Despite what appears to be a fairly simplistic shape, like many other stealthy planforms it’s a pain in the arse to model properly. Since the A-12 never made it into the air there really isn’t a huge variety of reference pictures out there. Without decent references, its actually quite a difficult shape to make and it look good. Fortunately, I stumbled upon some of the production drawings on http://www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com Iif you are into Space and aviation History its worth spending some time browsing the site. It’s really interesting. Scott – the author – has some brilliant sources and sells some really good high res and vellum prints of aerospace design blueprints. (I’m not on commission Just a huge fan.) The current model is probably the 5th or 6th version of the model but represents about 12 attempts to get it in game and working. There still a lot of details to do. Textures to polish, Instruments to finish, HUD and MFD work. Oh and lots and lots of Baking. Crashing on Tonoa So I’ve been somewhat successful. The beta is ingame. There is still quite a bit of texture work to do and I’ve got a tonne of work to do with the Air Weapons pack too. So, we are making good progress and despite crashing on Tonoa so often that I’ve removed about 20% of the tree coverage the flight model and weapons delivery development is proceeding well. Oh yeah. Have I mentioned that I really hate the PhysX implementation on planes. Have fun, Rock 17 Sept 17.
  5. Looks great! Can't wait to fly this thing!
  6. Yet another quick update, Woe is me!

    The hawk!! Yes it lives!! I've been waiting for one for so long. Good to see you back at it!
  7. Its August Bank Holiday monday in the UK and for once its not raining! But as per tradition I am working on addons... while drinking...BBQ Chicken and or steak may be involved later. I don't know how many people will know or even care but the Hawk T1A / Mk60 series aircraft doesn't actually have a HUD like other aircraft. Its only got a gunsight. My research suggests that its a Ferranti Type 'F'-95. So its really just an aiming point. Its going to be a bit f a challenge to setup I think. Atleast when it comes to the non-RAF loadouts on the Mk60 series. "Pretty in Pink" My god daughter was over today and here first response when seeing the pics it was its looks pretty in pink. She is eight and at that stage where everything is pink. Her bedroom looks like a pink paint bomb testing ground. The joy of unwrapping and materials. The pink is the base material colour, it makes it easier to find the unwrapped and untextured parts. Part way through the job After adding some of the labels. Cockpit "tub" bump mapping rivets. I'm not that keen that i need to count rivets and model them all individually. These were all taken a few days ago. today's efforts were more focused on drinking the beer but i've been unwrapping switches and drawing labels so perhaps not as visially interesting. Have fun. Rock 28 August 2017
  8. Yet another quick update, Woe is me!

    You're doing great work.
  9. Yet another quick update. Ok so it’s not so quick and it’s not exactly what I was planning on talking about. This was going to be about helicopters. According to the plan, it should be about the helicopters but when I sat down to write it there simply wasn’t much interesting to write about. Simply put, things are proceeding slowly. They just arent visually interesting. Unless you want to know about hitpoints, rvmats and config settings. Woe is me. I’ve had some problems with my main PC recently, three hard drives dying one after another. Had to swap out the motherboard too, headset died, driver issues all sorts plaguing me. I’ve still got one bug that I just can’t shift. Random lock up – everything freezes and there is no coming back. You have to reset and it leaves nothing in the event logs. So, you can imagine, confidence that the system won’t just die on me when I’m baking or just modelling something isn’t too high. Progress has been slowed. But things are moving. The helos will follow soon enough. The LPD is still causing me no end of grief. Scripts, alignment, poly counts, proxies, damage simulation. Oh, woe is me, just don’t even go there. Typhoon is paused while i sort out the Air Weapons - more on that below. Helos are a bit tedious - all the unseen slog of damage, rvmats and texture tweaking. And a lot of other stuff. Hawks are flying So recently, I’ve been playing around with the Hawk T1A. Mainly because I had reached a point with the Typhoon that i didnt want to mess with the model and setup. It became obscenely complicated because of the pre-Jets DLC menu system I'd been developing I didn't want to deal with untangling all the bits while I tried to work out the new features. So the Hawk T1A has become my testbed for the new feature set. Success, mostly In this we have Success! Woohoo. If you aren’t a modder yourself you probably aren’t aware of some of the issues aircraft modders have been facing. The physX on the planes is a pain in the arse. The majority of people I’ve spoken too are having problems with it. Using Firewill’s tutorial doesn’t seem to help either. Mad things happen to the Hawk and others when I try to use it. I must be missing something but no one I know has got it working properly yet. I’ve had some ‘fun’ with the ejection seat setup too. Attempting to follow BIS’s setup didn’t work. First it was, "there is no seat". Then we had, "We have a seat but no pilot". Then we had "Spinal comression, my head is under my arse" (No jokes please) and finally we had sucess, albeit pressed a bit too far into the seat. Eddie aka WLD427 managed to sort it out for me in the end. As well as some problems with the ADEN 30 mm cannon pod on the Hawks. It proved a very frustrating setup but satisfying in the end. Without his help, I’d have gone back to making Rubber Ducks. It was just that frustrating. Down the Rabbit hole But it has led me down a huge rabbit hole or Air Weapons. I can’t tell you how much of a surprise this has been. Messing around with the Jets DLC has shown me that I needed to re-think some of my addons. Especially the weapons use. Then setting up the Hawk to use the new pylon system just pulled the rug out from under me. I’ve had to re-work and re-config all my weapons and make pylons, racks and rails for them. Given I had over 150 items in the pack to start with I now have 189. Some of which – like the rocket pods – I’m just going to have to remake. Sounds like fun doesn’t it. Given the Air Weapons pack is common to 80% of the addons sat in testing folder and since I haven’t yet find a way around actually doing the work properly. (Although, If I’m honest I’ve tried) ; I need to sort the pack out first. before trying to add the pylons setup to everything else. Procrastination is a true artform when done properly. And with that insightful note. I leave you be. Think of me sloggin through thousands of lines of config setting up all the weapons. Lots and lots of weapons... Have fun because one of us needs to. Rock 15 Aug 2017
  10. hermes450_render_UK_12.jpg

    Awesome man, this would be pretty sweet to use. =0
  11. hermes450_render_UK_12.jpg

    Yes. Its still in the queue. The confis need updating and there is some work to do on the shlter and support units.
  12. hermes450_render_UK_12.jpg

    Any chance you still working on this?
  13. I know how you feel, I'm in the same boat with Clyde and Hermes... have loads of photos but not the ones I need.... All I can say is keep at it, it's looking awesome.
  14. Great job Rock! Certainly a lot of work ahead of you. It is getting there. -SGTGunner
  15. Its many, many, weeks since I started this project and now it’s finally starting to move over to Object Builder. But honestly, it’s still not even close to getting in game. I can’t tell you how much of a struggle it’s been to get this far. But the biggest problem is with time and motivation. People complain about being teased and “oh why don’t you complete X”. And all I can assume is that they’ve never tried to make anything more than a box. If they even tried at all. Try committing 20-30+ hours a week ontop of a job, household chores and some level of (none internet enabled) social life. When you sit down and start to work on something like this it doesn’t actually hit you just how big a job it is until you get into it. Once the basic structure is done you start to look at what you are missing. Its then that the detail that you need to add that actually jumps out at you. Especially when you look at the real thing then look at your own model. Its odd things like pipes, light fittings, cabinets. All the things you ignore in daily life just because they are always there. Remove them and you suddenly notice and it makes a space feel empty and dead without them. Then suddenly you keep finding some little detail that you need to make then another and another. It does get repetative and kind of depressing. At some point you have to find something else to do to bring yourself out of the cycle of grinding out UV maps and textures. Moving the big stuff into Object builder is that for me. Textures arent final! The textures shown are just place holders. Don't judge yet. I've not really attempted to paint everything at this stage since the UV layout and texel count are changing all the time. My 'normal' work flow on this job has been thrown out of the window many weeks ago. After I made the basic hull I began focusing on features as shown in earlier updates, the CWIS and the Deck crane etc. But then i realised I was going to have to re-visit them to make sure they all fitted in to the hull's scaling and colours etc. So I've decided to go big first and then return to features. This will mean I get the Hull and interior done and unwrapped. Then I will detail it. Then return to make hi-poly/res models to properly texture, bake and create decent materials for the final product. It has been a completely messed up process so far but I am learning new things. And re-learning more than a few things I had forgotten over time. Go Big or Go Home! As of last night, there is 133,696 faces on the model in OB. This does not include the interior and more than half the detailing. The final figure is probably going to pass 280,000. Which is a lot but if you assume a lot of the recent planes when loaded up are 28,000-32,000 faces each is really only 10 planes. The killer, which shouldnt be a surprise to any addon maker, is the anchor chains. They are too big to use a texture trick, and too much of a feature to ignore them. But they do take nearly 17,000 faces. When you add over a kilometer of railings, post as well these things do add up really quickly. Now might be a good time to invest in that new GPU you've been thinking about... It’s at this point you realise that an obsession with detail may not be the best path to take. Before anyone panics too much I will LoD the hell out of this too to ensure the best performance I can. I really do miss the Ducks. So simple by comparison. The Albion class will be: Static – its just too big to be anything else given the limitations of the game engine. Made up of 4 blocks, each configured as “class house” to enable ladders lights etc Armed with 2x CWIS (more on that in a bit) 2x 30mm Cannon Numerous 7.62mm GPMG mounts Carrying: 4x LCVP mk 5 – two configured for ViV and 2 for personnel only. 2x LCU mk10 – ViV with some personnel capacity 2x RHIBs Mexefloat rafts Curse of the Real World In nearly every project I've ever worked on, in this community or in the real world the requirements change. One thing that is guarenteed to happen is that at the moment you think you have a good accurate model. And I do mean the exact moment you sit back and say to yourself, "I'm proud of that". Some b@#$%£* points out that its isnt actually correct anymore. In this case, a really nice person (yes that is sarcasm), told me that the Royal Navy in Albion's recent refit had replaced the Goalkeeper CWIS with the Phalanx. I really liked my Goalkeeper model. They also swapped out the main radar and a whole raft of other changes. You can imagine, I'm thrilled. Not only does it replace the CWIS but parts of the super structure have to be remade! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! Okay so its not that bad. More additions than huge alterations but it was a pain in the arse. I will probably release the Bulwark with the Goal keeper and and the Albion with the Phalanx. But the in-game reality isnt that different. Command & Control, Logistics I’ve not really attempted to do much regarding the config yet, but I do intend on making the ship as practical as the game engine will allow. This includes leveraging the radar capabilities and attempting to make the LPD a floating command post for all the Milsimers out there. The model does feature a C&C compartment. Which If I can get my head around the radar and some scripting should morph into something usefull ingame. I am also planning to create a series of resupply objects, material and weapons/ammo crate that can be loaded onto the HAM Trucks, LCU and LCVPs, even moved onto the deck and sling loaded, that will allow you to move your stores ashore to establish a base and re-supply from the ship as an when needed. Progress of a sort. Right at the start I said this was going to be a long job. I didn’t realise how difficult it would be either. The technical side isn’t too hard. But the LPD is pushing the limit of what the game engine can handle. It turns out its pushing my patience too. I’ve had to re-build and re-map the Hull three times. I don’t actually have decent hull reference so everything is guesstimated. Which the Engineer in me hates. I have photos and a really low res drawing but no proper drawings so not everything wanted to fit together. Eg the LCVs on the davits. The deck was too narrow on the first build. Meaning you couldn’t get to the LCVP to deploy them let alone get in. So, after a few weeks of frustration and no social life at all; I’m just focused on getting the external structure complete and then I’ll return to the interior spaces. But there is still a long way to go and a lot of detail to make. Wish me good luck. I am going to need it. Rock
  16. IP Theft and its impact on YOU!

    No reason to tolerate it. Given moves to monetise content in games I think its even more important to make a stand.
  17. IP Theft and its impact on YOU!

    Happens in all games that allow mods. In DCS there was a kid that ripped models from other flight sims and after being told to stop on multiple times he was banned..
  18. I'll send you a PM with the link of my stuff....
  19. When I say T Boat actually mean Trafalgar Class boats https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trafalgar-class_submarine
  20. What you got? I'm trying to find a decent Astute and T Boat 3 view. I've only found poor quality, low res ones so far.
  21. IF you want plans for a couple of RN subs give me a shout... Looking awesome.
  22. Project 636 "Kilo" Class Submarine

    The Kilo class is the NATO reporting name for a naval diesel-electric attack submarine that is made in Russia. The original version of the vessels were designated Project 877 Paltus (Halibut) in Soviet Union. There is also a more advanced version, designated as Improved Kilo-class submarine in the West, and Project 636 Varshavyanka in Russia. Given that the type is operated by several of the ASA (Opfor) Nations in the real world and it fits right in with the game engine limitations its perfect for IAP
  23. ArmA3’s underwater features have always seemed a bit of an oddity to me. At release Bohemia made a big noise about being able to swim, dive and SDVs etc. But nothing was really made of it and the community has never embraced it very much either. Sure, there has been some subs but no one seemed to use them. Due to the game engine limits, they really aren’t practical either. Size does matter So, I thought I’d have a proper look at the capabilities and limitations. Leaving the actual model aside for a moment, it was the limitations that I wanted to get a grasp of. For those that don’t know ArmA has a geometry limit 50m x 50m x ?m (x,y,z) No object can exceed this if it has a roadway lod. 64m x 64m x ?m - If it doesn’t have a roadway. BUT! In some cases, it seems you can get even longer providing it’s not as wide. For unknown reasons volume comes into play. I don’t know how or why but it does. No solid rules in ArmA modding guys Moving on, the best OPFOR Sub that fits that statement (and the IAP requirements) seems to be the “Kilo” class sub. It’s 74m long, 9.9m at the beam (widest point on the hull) and thanks to the quirkiness of ArmA3’s game engine is modelled as a single piece and is completely solid in game. Why Submarines? For my IAP project I wanted a to have a hidden threat to shipping, a way to lob missiles onto ground targets without being seen and generally cause havoc. So, torpedoes and sub launched cruise missiles are going to be on the cards at some point. This in game version of the Kilo, is armed with the Russian Type 53-65 Torpedo and the 3M54 Klub Land attack missile. A limited mixed load should help with balance. The real sub can carry 18x 533mm weapons or missiles. If you assume a load out of 12 Torpedoes and 6 Land Attack Missiles that should be realistic for a full war time load…? Overkill? Not sure yet. But does it sink? Just like the Vanguard class subs the Kilo is still too large to sink using the stock controls. Simply put the game engine just doesnt liek any subs larger than the SDV. So as with the larger subs I'm going to give it some scripted assistance. Which to be honest I think will be much more fun to use. 'Rig for Submerged running!' 'Blow All ballast' 'Dive planes to 10 degrees' 'Make revolutions for 5 knots' C'mon you just read that in Sean Connery's voice didn't you! Hunt for red October: ArmA Edition anyway? Collaboration A few people that know me well enough know that I hate writing configs and I can’t write scripts well enough to do that much beyond the basics. So I’ve teamed up with someone else to do a trade models for coding skills. I’m going to let him out himself, but the end intent for him is to provide a naval weapons/anti-submarine package that addon makers can eventually incorporate into their own addons. So, the Kilo sub will not only be released un the RKSL/IAP tag but it will also see Steam release via my new partner. Should be good. I’m excited anyway. More later. Rock
  1. Load more activity
×