0003856: Eagle A-III OCP (Raven) backpack should weigh more than 4 Lbs

Notes
(0007208) reyhard (administrator) 2017-12-11 08:06	changed mass to 100, ps, there is no weight in Arma - just combined mass & size so don't trust what ACE says

(0007209) fragthecullen (reporter) 2017-12-11 08:51 edited on: 2017-12-11 09:11	I don't understand what you mean. In all instances, the mass settings in all of the config files in RHS correspond to real-world weights, in tenths of a pound. For example, the mass value added to the M4/M16 by the M203 and M320 in your mod are an additional 30-33 units, which corresponds to their real-world weights of 3 lbs and 3.3 lbs, respectively. ACE reads the mass values directly from the config files; see the above attached second screenshot. The intent of this issue was to have the mass value for the Raven backpack changed to 158. I, among others in my group, pay a lot of attention to the over all weight of a given loadout - we try to keep the overall weight under 75 lbs for the sake of stamina.

(0007210) reyhard (administrator) 2017-12-11 09:12	just google how ace reads the mass and you will find up it's made up formula https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Weapon_Config_Guidelines [^] "Mass is a new unit used to describe weight and volume of an object used. Each container has a set capacity in the same units." Not all weapons are following equation that ACE use since it doesn't make sense - there are i.e. small weapons which can be heavy as fuck & some big ass weapons which are very light weight - in both cases you have to take two parameters into account.

(0007211) fragthecullen (reporter) 2017-12-11 13:26 edited on: 2017-12-11 13:37	[Thank you for your patience. I'm sorry for being difficult, but I reopened the issue to ensure that this gets seen by you, instead of being lost.] Okay. That [mass as weight AND volume] is a hard pill to swallow, but it explains a few things, like why the BIS AK-12 has a much higher value for mass than any of the RHS AK-series rifles - accounting for weight AND volume would cause the mass value to be arbitrarily higher: a kilogram of steel and a kilogram of feathers share the same weight, but the feathers are more voluminous. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uH0hikcwjIA [^] It would be more difficult to fit a kilogram of feathers into an assault pack than it would be for a kilogram of steel. However, the arbitrary number assignment would be on the part of Bohemia, and the convention is then rejected by ACE 3. ACE 3 has a PBO dedicated to reassigning the mass values of all BIS weapons to account for weight alone: ace_realisticweights.pbo - and there are other clues that indicate that ACE is interpreting mass as weight, in the overheating module: https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/issues/3774 [^] The formula cited assigns the value of the barrel weight variable based on the assumption that the weight of the barrel accounts for half of the weapon's overall mass, and then divides it by 22. This is not an arbitrary or magic number; this equation takes the mass value of the weapon, divides it by ten to convert from tenth-pounds to pounds, divides again by the approximate relation of pounds to kilograms [1 kilogram is approx 2.2 pounds], and then divides that number in half to account for the notion of barrel weight being half of the weapon weight. The conversion to kilograms is in the name of cleaner calculations based in the metric system. There are two ways to handle this issue: You can follow the example of the BIS AK-12, and assign a mass value that is GREATER than its weight in tenth-pounds, to account for the inflation caused by volume, http://feedback.rhsmods.org/view.php?id=3595 [^] or we, as a community, can assume that the mass value equals weight alone, because, at the end of the day, 'Tactical Tetris' dictates that a soldier WILL find a way to fit that kilogram of feathers into the assault pack, and his feet don't care about the volume of the load, only how hard it is pressing him down into his boots. [male pronouns used because there are no females in Arma 3 - yet.]

(0007212) reyhard (administrator) 2017-12-11 13:40	Strictly following this rule would create such nonsense as i.e. rpg pack not being able to fit designed amount of rpgs. Changing capacity of backpack would lead then to having something more capacious than i.e. Carryall backpack. On the other hand lowering mass of rockets & keeping same capacity of backpack would lead i.e. to being able pack 20 rpg rockets to Bergen backpack. That being said, it's not one sided as you portray.

Issue History
Date Modified	Username	Field	Change
2017-12-10 20:38	fragthecullen	New Issue
2017-12-10 20:38	fragthecullen	File Added: 20171210222511_1.jpg
2017-12-11 08:06	reyhard	Note Added: 0007208
2017-12-11 08:06	reyhard	Status	new => resolved
2017-12-11 08:06	reyhard	Fixed in Version	=> 0.4.5
2017-12-11 08:06	reyhard	Resolution	open => fixed
2017-12-11 08:06	reyhard	Assigned To	=> reyhard
2017-12-11 08:50	fragthecullen	File Added: Screenshot 2017-12-11 10.47.52.png
2017-12-11 08:51	fragthecullen	Status	resolved => new
2017-12-11 08:51	fragthecullen	Resolution	fixed => reopened
2017-12-11 08:51	fragthecullen	Note Added: 0007209
2017-12-11 08:52	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007209	View Revisions
2017-12-11 08:53	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007209	View Revisions
2017-12-11 08:53	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007209	View Revisions
2017-12-11 08:58	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007209	View Revisions
2017-12-11 08:59	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007209	View Revisions
2017-12-11 09:11	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007209	View Revisions
2017-12-11 09:12	reyhard	Note Added: 0007210
2017-12-11 09:12	reyhard	Status	new => resolved
2017-12-11 09:12	reyhard	Resolution	reopened => fixed
2017-12-11 13:26	fragthecullen	Note Added: 0007211
2017-12-11 13:26	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007211	View Revisions
2017-12-11 13:27	fragthecullen	Resolution	fixed => reopened
2017-12-11 13:28	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007211	View Revisions
2017-12-11 13:28	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007211	View Revisions
2017-12-11 13:29	fragthecullen	Status	resolved => new
2017-12-11 13:31	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007211	View Revisions
2017-12-11 13:34	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007211	View Revisions
2017-12-11 13:36	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007211	View Revisions
2017-12-11 13:37	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007211	View Revisions
2017-12-11 13:37	fragthecullen	Note Edited: 0007211	View Revisions
2017-12-11 13:40	reyhard	Note Added: 0007212
2017-12-11 13:40	reyhard	Status	new => closed
2017-12-11 13:40	reyhard	Resolution	reopened => won't fix

Relationships