Home » PLAYER'S HQ 1.13 » JA2 Complete Mods & Sequels » JA2UB Vietnam SOG'69 » General Vietnam '69 support thread
General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77015] Fri, 27 September 2002 01:30 Go to next message
Dr.Quack is currently offline Dr.Quack

 
Messages:124
Registered:November 2001
Location: old Europe
I'll open up this thread to try to collect some information on any issues/questions/problems/secrets/hints on Vietnam 69 SOG that can't be directly classified as bugs, or remained unmentioned elsewhere Wink For starters, this here should be helpful:

- Even more important than taking a merc with high leadership is not to forget a dedicated lockpicking/explosives expert. You're a secret spy and sabotage team and his skills will be needed in many places throughout the whole campaign. For the diplomatic part it's possible to get by with Sarge for the start and train someone else up to 65+ leadership.

- Again, you're a SOG team.. it's possible to zigzag through from the crashsite to Tay Ninh base without seeing one enemy, if fighting the Cong with a Deer gun isn't your thing. But you wouldn't leave the jungle in a mess, would you ?

- There are several subquests that you have to obtain from the NPCs in Vietnam and elsewhere. Quests will be indicated in the laptop history log and generally involve getting a special item and then giving it back to the right person. NPCs may be reluctant to talk if you approach them wrongly or your your merc doesn't have high enough leadership, but UBs general bugginess makes it worth taking several mercs and make each of them 'talk' if the response was negative.

- If you change the damage values, you're a sissy. Now if this were a commercial venture, I would claim that the damage and other values were derived in a scientific, patented and award-winning process that started as a family business in 1870 Smile
Instead I'll just say that every weapon has its place in this mod and many things are quite different from the standard weapons set or the various high damage mods. In V69, guns are generally a bit more low-key and serve more specialized functions. For example most machineguns won't take a sniperscope despite their long range but you'll be hard pressed to find something else that can match their firepower in burst mode. Throughout the whole campaign, there is a need to get close and bring to bear the 'stinger' type lowrange weapons, heavy grenades and knives. I've found it a viable tactic to just spray groups of enemies with cheap machinegun fire so they won't advance while someone else rushes by to drop some molotovs on them from the side.
Now the big fat explosions look really good in the lush jungles, but the Vietcong like to think the same. Actually, they have their own brand of bad-mutha weapon in this mod to offset their poor AIs a little, so extreme caution is advised at all times. Of course capturing one of these launchers and some rockets to spare could give you the edge, while US weapons researchers are still dabbling about the best way to launch a 40mm grenade Wink

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77016] Fri, 27 September 2002 21:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bearpit is currently offline Bearpit

 
Messages:1068
Registered:August 2001
Location: Sydney Australia.
A slightly modified gameworld map which Jay decided not to use. Contains helicopter & artillery pics indicating where firebases & dust off areas are located. Might appeal to some.

Rename as B_MAP & place into your Data/interface folder.

http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/webhome/templates/B_MAP_vietnamsog69V2.zip

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77017] Sat, 28 September 2002 22:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
MH is currently offline MH

 
Messages:33
Registered:August 2002
Location: Czech Rep
Few comments:
minigrenades are useless as a weapon, giving just 4-10 damage. Can be used hust to knock-down enemies.
M-16A1 are unreliable. Very, very unreliable. I repaired one to 100% and this gun jammed in third battle, condition 67%. Maybe I did something wrong, but this convinced me to keep good old CAR-15.
Lockpicks-explosives expert is a must. Trevor is probably the best choice. Relatively cheap and learns fast.

Report message to a moderator

Private 1st Class
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77018] Mon, 30 September 2002 07:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Uzi is currently offline Uzi

 
Messages:69
Registered:March 2000
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Quote:
Originally posted by MH:
M-16A1 are unreliable. Very, very unreliable. I repaired one to 100% and this gun jammed in third battle, condition 67%.
Sounds like the M16, all right. This ones from ReaLife(TM), the weapon was notorious for jamming due to not being kept clean. I would think the same problem should plague any other rifles of the family as well (like the CAR-15).

Uzi

Report message to a moderator

Corporal
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77019] Mon, 30 September 2002 08:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
D A Sharp is currently offline D A Sharp

 
Messages:161
Registered:November 2001
Location: Palo Alto, California
The first M16s used in Vietnam by US Army forces were borrowed from the USAF. These weapons didn't come w/cleaning kits. The standard Army rifle was .308 cal. those cleaning rods didn't fit down .223 cal bores! The M16 also requires a greater degree of cleaning than the M14 did, but the soldiers using USAF M16s didn't know this at first. The first US Army purchase was of the M16A1, a product improved M16 with chrome lined barrel (corosion resistance), a forward bolt assist(helpfull with dirty ammo/chamber problems), and closed flash supressor (Open one on USAF M16 would easily fill with debris). The M16A1 of the vietnam era is not much different from the ones being used successfully all over the world today, in every type of terrain and climate, and by 1st and 3rd world soldiers. The initial fielding problems by the US Army of USAF rifles without appropriate cleaning equipment and training has led to the persistant rumor that M16s were pieces of shit. This is true of the USAF M16 but not the M16A1 and all following models. The XM177 was a USAF SMG and was based upon the M16. The Commando (or XM177E1) was a US Army varient of the M16A1 with all its product improvements. Likewise the XM177E2 was based upon the Army weapon.

For an accurate representation the USAF M16 & XM177 should have different repair/durability stats from all the other weapons of this family. The M16A1 and later weapons are very reliable weapons.

Report message to a moderator

Staff Sergeant
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77020] Tue, 01 October 2002 04:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Uzi is currently offline Uzi

 
Messages:69
Registered:March 2000
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Sorry, D A Sharp. This was a case of "old misconceptions die hard" for me. Somebody has corrected me before on the reliability issues and differences between the M16 and M16A1, but did I learn? No... Hopefully this time the second time's the charm.

I've also heard that part of the problem was that an ammo manufacturer changed the powder to something different from the original specs, causing even more fouling. Is this true?

Uzi

Report message to a moderator

Corporal
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77021] Wed, 02 October 2002 09:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
abradley is currently offline abradley

 
Messages:225
Registered:December 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by Uzi:
{snip)
I've also heard that part of the problem was that an ammo manufacturer changed the powder to something different from the original specs, causing even more fouling. Is this true?
Uzi
A Senate 'Armed Service Commotte' found that several Army mandated changes from the USAF AR-15 were causing the problems.

1. Number of groves in the barrel was changed so the rifle would maintain trajectory at below -65 degrees.

2. Army required 'manual chambering' of cartridges be added, while this sounds like common sense it added to the complexity of the mechanism.

3. The Army changed the gunpower used in the cartridge. This made the M-16 fire at a much faster rate in auto. the faster rate stressed the design beyond it's design capabilities. The M-16 was tested and approved with 'IMR' propellant, but the vast majority of propellant in the field was 'Ball' propellant. (I don't know the differance between Ball and IMR propellents?)

The 'Ball' propellent left more residue in the weapon then the 'IMR' leading to jamming.

3. Shell casings overexpended when fired and didn't eject from the chamber for the next round.

It was not unknown for the M-16 to blowup in users faces in the heat of battle.

These is just a few of the problems.

But that was then! During the Gulf War the SAS units used the contemporary M-16s as the preferred weapon due to it's reliability and clean lines (less likely to catch on clothing or other obstructions.)

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant 1st Class
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77022] Wed, 02 October 2002 16:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
blackmac is currently offline blackmac

 
Messages:91
Registered:July 2002
Location: MNL
Nice info D A Sharp and abradley :cheers: ... you guys from the AF?

Report message to a moderator

Corporal 1st Class
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77023] Wed, 02 October 2002 18:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rev is currently offline Rev

 
Messages:31
Registered:April 2001
Location: Australia
Currently I've reached the An Loc base and discovered one RPG-7 soviet launcher and plenty of PGF-7 rockets. Is this two supposed to work together? This one won't work together.

Things really get stressing when the NVA's happily bombed us with the anti-tank rockets and we can't return the same favour Smile

EDIT: Found another launcher, works fine, nevermind..

Report message to a moderator

Private 1st Class
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77024] Wed, 02 October 2002 18:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
abradley is currently offline abradley

 
Messages:225
Registered:December 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by blackmac:
Nice info D A Sharp and abradley :cheers: ... you guys from the AF?
Yes, retired enlisted, 22 years concurrent service, 1954-76

Best
Andy:cheers:

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant 1st Class
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77025] Thu, 03 October 2002 06:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
masguy is currently offline masguy

 
Messages:45
Registered:November 2001
Location: Maryland, USA
Just a few notes on the M-16 jamming issue (I wrote an article about this about 20 years ago).

The M-16s first sent to Vietnam did not have cleaning kits, SNAFU - no! The propellent intended for the gun cleaned and lubricated the weapon. So what happened? Colt (if memory serves) did not want to pay the licensing fee to the company that held the patent for the propellent and decided to ignore the fact that the gun was designed specifically around the special propellent and used off the shelf stuff instead. The result were jams and the other problems described bu other folks here.

While changes to the weapon solved some of the problems, as late as the 1980s the Army Times reported that US troops on manuvers in Egypt - I think it was called "Operation Brightstar" could barely carry enough lubricant to keep their weapons functioning in dry desert conditions. I think there still may be a lubricant issue. You can tell by looking to see if US forces still have those little squeeze bottles in their helmet netting. Those little squeeze bottles contain lubricant for the M-16.

Masguy

Report message to a moderator

Corporal
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77026] Sat, 05 October 2002 00:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sgt York is currently offline Sgt York

 
Messages:79
Registered:June 2000
Location: San Antonio TX
Now in Binh Long province and getting real tired of the jungle. The VC supply bases were a disappointment equipment-wise. Lotsa $$$ around, but so far no place to spend it. BTW, you all do not want to buy Shadow. Take my word for this.

Interesting thing happened in B15. I swiped an RPK from an NV regular at the end of combat and had Thor pick it up. While I was in the inventory screen, I heard a loud explosion, and found Thor had disappeared

Report message to a moderator

Corporal
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77027] Mon, 07 October 2002 19:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
-=ZigZag=- is currently offline -=ZigZag=-
Messages:2
Registered:October 2002
Hi!
Is there a general weapons and ammo problem in the Nam-Mod? - I want to ask before my game is too advanced and I might have missed a patch...
I guess it is purpose that nades do not have the same pictures as in UB (standart handgrenades look like the UB- gas nades etc.).
- But if You for example unload the Sterling-MP, You will not be able to reload it: the clip You get out of the Sterling is an "9 mm Smg 34 Rd.Mag.", that does not fit.
So, is this just a little bug or do I have to change anything?

Have Fun! - ZigZag

Report message to a moderator

Civilian
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77028] Mon, 07 October 2002 22:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dr.Quack is currently offline Dr.Quack

 
Messages:124
Registered:November 2001
Location: old Europe
Sorry, with a huge campaign like this you have to go for something like an M$ sort of support: Try a fresh install of UB into a separate directory, apply the Sirtech patch and then V69 on top of that. Only UB english and russian versions are supported by the wedit utility that is used to patch the executable, however the english 1.01 executable is said to work with other localized versions of UB. I have no idea what might be causing your problem, but there's no bigger problem in V69 apart from the standard UB bugs and some small details in some maps. And even those are going to be fixed once B-X gets back online Smile

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant
Re: General Vietnam '69 support thread[message #77029] Tue, 08 October 2002 07:59 Go to previous message
-=ZigZag=- is currently offline -=ZigZag=-
Messages:2
Registered:October 2002
-THX-

I

Report message to a moderator

Civilian
Next Topic: Need Help
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Jan 21 09:40:57 GMT+2 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01228 seconds