ArmA 2 site hacked

[Bulldogs 10]

Not sure if this was already posted as I'm too lazy to read through the entire thread but, does anyone else think that the page number relates to a date, as in June, 2013 possible release date.

It seems obvious that the estimate is likely a date though, a past date, but when rearranged it could be a date in 2012.

[HarryZhe 10]

"#081206" could be a hint at either the 8th of december, or 12th of august, 2006.

http://news.google.com.au/archivesearch?as_q=*&num=10&hl=en&btnG=Search+Archives&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_user_ldate=12%2F08%2F06&as_user_hdate=12%2F08%2F06&lr=&as_src=&as_price=p0&as_scoring=a

http://news.google.com.au/archivesearch?as_q=*&num=10&hl=en&btnG=Search+Archives&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_user_ldate=08%2F12%2F06&as_user_hdate=08%2F12%2F06&lr=&as_src=&as_price=p0&as_scoring=a

Just an idea... I'm not gunna trawl through all of those articles myself on just a hunch, though

[Smurf 12]

Someone tried to overlay the roman numbers\points (submarine) in the map?

[TeamLandowar 0]

Why would you only nuke those places though? I mean maybe there are more nukes than that but why only show those then? It wouldn't be one commander responsible for those things or anything like that. It looks more like troop movements to me although I do find some distances to be a little extreme. There is also the question of why would the US nuke France from Turkey?

It makes no sense to me if its troop movements.

Why would you deploy troops in Turkey and push them all the way to Belgium?

Why would you deploy troops in Mediterean, south of italy southern shores and move them all the way to middle France?

Why would you deploy troops in Black see and move them all the way to some remote location in Poland?

There is no way to support that kind of offensive action in foreign territory. That kind of operation would take long months and nobody would be so bold to plan it that far ahead.

I mean - "Lets move our tanks, from Turkey, all the way to Belgium" - theres too much to go wrong in such a far fetched plan, to ensure no one would take that plan seriously.

Ive made "unknown" as the offensive force because no one can say for sure its the US making nuke drops/assault.

[HarryZhe 10]

I'm with Landowar re: it being a naval map primarily. I think it might be a new nuclear sub simulator... Bohemia would be smart to make such a game, as afaik there isn't a modern nuclear sub sim... Only silent hunter which is ww2 setting but still has a strong following and steady market, so why not a modern sub sim?

But i'm not sure.

The astute class would be fairly useful, i imagine, in defending from naval launched missiles, and that map seems to be showing a lot of naval missiles.

A game where you play as royal navy subs defending mainland europe from missile attack would be.... fucking awesome.

[Bulldogs 10]

Slightly off topic but I was looking through the AAN website and saw a story containing this :

Recently, ARMEX tradeshows have become the focus of anti-war protesters. Several hundred members of the Organisation of Protesters Demanding Reform (OfPDR) stormed the Czech trade show in 2009, looting a significant amount of valuable equipment, but unable to bring the ARMEX event to a close.

old news I'm sure but it made me laugh.

Anyways, not that it's relavent but the storyt was apparently posted on 10/10/10 at 8:05. At the end of the story there's talk about China (could be a hint towards what the story was talking about though)

Also, and more on topic, the new image that's come up from the new news story is of a billboard which roughly translated (and my Czech sucks, so very roughly tanslated) "Follow the Chernarus Red Star Movement"

EDIT : BTW, just a thought. But has anyone tried loading up ArmA 2 with the latest beta, going to the location of that Billboard, and setting up a mission with the date the same as that Estimate on the page, and set the time to 6:13 (the page number)?

[jakerod 254]

A game where you play as royal navy subs defending mainland europe from missile attack would be.... fucking awesome.

By firing nukes at your own port?

Not to mention... why would you curve your missiles up Italy and then into France? To make sure that they have a better chance at shooting them down? Why would you fire Nukes from Turkey into Belgium when you can fire them from the Naval unit north of England?

Why would you deploy troops in Turkey? Maybe they are Turkish troops who are already there? Same with the Black Sea. Turkey is a member of NATO. Perhaps they are helping taking back Europe.

Either idea has just as much support. I feel that mine makes a bit more sense though especially when it comes to firing Nukes up Italy and then curving them into France. We don't have enough information to draw conclusions on either of these ideas though I guess.

[1LT.Wolf.F 10]

Hmm Eagle Wing makes sense to me...

Only Island in ArmA2 is Utes, and the submarine...

The last Picture of Eagle Wing is Utes, where we escape

However fitting, I'm not sold on ASTUTE

For some reason I cannot get UTEs out of my mind... yet it is so small... :\

but I am also delirious now... and my F5 finger is done...

It seems things have quieted down, Europe must be asleep,

good no one expects the Canadians yet.... Time to Strike!!!

[HarryZhe 10]

By firing nukes at your own port?

Not to mention... why would you curve your missiles up Italy and then into France? To make sure that they have a better chance at shooting them down? Why would you fire Nukes from Turkey into Belgium when you can fire them from the Naval unit north of England?

I'm not quite sure... They don't make much sense if interpreted as the movements of ground forces either, a lot of the lines of advance cross bodies of water. Instead of travelling through Liguria in italy, our troops are taking a swim. Instead of crossing the Hellespont, cutting across the black sea. Where's the sense in that? They're not, avoiding crossing any borders, that's for sure.

At any rate, NAV definitely refers to a naval assault of some kind, because NAV is only labelled on lines originating in the water. It's obvious the attack is coming from the east, because the only "land" advances are in the east, with further west being airborne.

Missiles could be steering to avoid radar/missile defense sites... Anyone know about the locations of those?

[-=seany=- 5]

heh heh, very cool thread. Nice games that BIS is playing :) . Thanks to unuldor :)

I suspect Arma3!

[Craig_VG 20]

Whatever happens, be it ep2, dlc3, or Arma 3, it will be epic

[jakerod 254]

I'm not quite sure... They don't make much sense if interpreted as the movements of ground forces either, a lot of the lines of advance cross bodies of water. Instead of travelling through Liguria in italy, our troops are taking a swim. Instead of crossing the Hellespont, cutting across the black sea. Where's the sense in that? They're not, avoiding crossing any borders, that's for sure.

At any rate, NAV definitely refers to a naval assault of some kind, because NAV is only labelled on lines originating in the water. It's obvious the attack is coming from the east, because the only "land" advances are in the east, with further west being airborne.

Missiles could be steering to avoid radar/missile defense sites... Anyone know about the locations of those?

It seems unlikely that Italy would have a radar defense site in the sea and not any along its entire length. Not to mention they made some very straight gaps in their missile defense sites if that is the case. The hellespont could be heavily defended so they go around it. Or they may just not have made the line that way and they may go over it and just made the line further north. How do you explain the ___xxxx____ lines if it is missiles?

[grub 10]

Man! No one woke me up lol

Well done UnuldorCZ! You are a great person for doing that and truly deserve the title of Forum Hero!

I'm still watching you though ;)

Edited May 5, 2011 by Grub

[HarryZhe 10]

It seems unlikely that Italy would have a radar defense site in the sea and not any along its entire length. Not to mention they made some very straight gaps in their missile defense sites if that is the case. The hellespont could be heavily defended so they go around it. Or they may just not have made the line that way and they may go over it and just made the line further north. How do you explain the ___xxxx____ lines if it is missiles?

Well yeah, theyre divisions of army and army groups but this implies nearly every single unit is not only amphibious but crosses water readilly without any real need to. The point RE: the hellespoint could be legit, but usually that kind of area is more defensible as a chokepoint for naval activity, not so much as an infantry thing. Ignoring it completely would leave the "east" with pretty much no capability to deploy ships from the black sea into the mediterranean.

And, the Italy group randomly wading across the sea still doesn't make any sense.

[jakerod 254]

Well yeah, theyre divisions of army and army groups but this implies nearly every single unit is not only amphibious but crosses water readilly without any real need to. The point RE: the hellespoint could be legit, but usually that kind of area is more defensible as a chokepoint for naval activity, not so much as an infantry thing. Ignoring it completely would leave the "east" with pretty much no capability to deploy ships from the black sea into the mediterranean.

And, the Italy group randomly wading across the sea still doesn't make any sense.

They could take boats. It would be similar to D-Day I guess. Probably not as big of a massacre though. I realize using Army troops for landings is a bit dated but they may lack enough Marines/Naval Infantry to do it.

[Binkowski 25]

so i figured out what it all means.

[HarryZhe 10]

They could take boats. It would be similar to D-Day I guess. Probably not as big of a massacre though. I realize using Army troops for landings is a bit dated but they may lack enough Marines/Naval Infantry to do it.

And, once they initially landed, they carried these boats with them to the next crossing?

Or are they a mechanised force in all amphibious vehicles?

...I still dont get why they dont just follow the coastline of italy.

[jakerod 254]

And, once they initially landed, they carried these boats with them to the next crossing?

Or are they a mechanised force in all amphibious vehicles?

...I still dont get why they dont just follow the coastline of italy.

No they leave them for their logistics groups who put them on trucks or take them with a support fleet to the next point. There is also the possibility that in the locations where they go across large tracks of land and then back to water that the lines were just made so they don't have 20 curves in them.

What good would following the coastline of Italy do? You can't take land by walking up the beach or by just taking boats up the shore.

[HarryZhe 10]

No they leave them for their logistics groups who put them on trucks or take them with a support fleet to the next point.

That explains how, but not why.

There is also the possibility that in the locations where they go across large tracks of land and then back to water that the lines were just made so they don't have 20 curves in them.

The only convincing point in favour so far, imo.

What good would following the coastline of Italy do? You can't take land by walking up the beach or by just taking boats up the shore.

Well, it means you don't need to have ships ready to take them across a small tract of water which doesn't actually make their journey shorter

[jakerod 254]

That explains how, but not why.

The only convincing point in favour so far, imo.

Well, it means you don't need to have ships ready to take them across a small tract of water which doesn't actually make their journey shorter

That's what they did during Operation Market Garden. They brought boats on trucks. Just because the arrow ends there doesn't mean that that is the only thing they want to do. They also need to take positions up the Italian peninsula or something is my guess.

One of the reasons that I think it is troop movements is because it looks exactly like some West Point Historical Atlases that I have from the Civil War, Napoleonic Wars, WWI and WWII. I've always seen troop movements shown with a broad arrow where as missile launches tend to be shown with a narrow line.

You know what though. I kind of just think we should wait until we have more information. It could go either way. We really don't have enough to act on and it would be a shame to draw the wrong conclusion and then be terribly disappointed when we found it was the migration routes of European swallows. Well, some would be terribly disappointed I've been dying for a good bird simulator for years.

Edited May 5, 2011 by Jakerod
stupidly used the battle of the bulge instead of market garden as an example

[HarryZhe 10]

yeah, i'll concede that my opinion is tinted by how awesome i think a naval sim centred around nuclear subs would be... I've made a bit of a stab at the current info, here's hoping someone "digs" something else up, so to speak

[grub 10]

then be terribly disappointed when we found it was the migration routes of European swallows. Well, some would be terribly disappointed I've been dying for a good bird simulator for years.

Heheh, we could really test out the coconut theory then!

But your right, we should wait for more.

[4 IN 1 0]

Thank you, UnuldorCZ, you deserves some fine beer.

Just wondering, did Portal ARG ever having people going to the forest edge and dig a hole there to find stuff? Or do we all are a little bit too crazy to do such thing?:p

[Fonz -UK- 10]

SDREAM

SDDUSTER

LGIGNITE

MKSEARCH...

Like the f*cking numbers in Black Ops, I cant get these out of my head! SDREAM Is I think the most significant one but I cant make any sense of it.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

And now this.

Anyone got a translation for the billboard?

http://www.aan-online.com/en/news/5-world/32-continued-digital-attack.html

Also curious, I don't recognize the specific location on Chenaurus

Edited May 5, 2011 by Pathetic_Berserker