Development Blog & Reveals

[Rovka 14]

Well, if you wish to turn against your former ally, you better come prepared, right?

That means getting your hands on decent equipment, and who says the AAF merely have the current two islands as their domain?? What if BIS decides to eventually add a few other islands/maps to that? Who's to say that content being released soon isn't going to be useful later? All the more choice model-wise right? That is if we're talking modding standard A3 ofcourse.. I for one welcome it. And no doubt all the content that is due will be seen throughout the course of the coming two campaigns. So complain a bit less please, BIS even release it for free..! (or at a game-buyers price, without an extra sum of money charged if you will.) And it begs the question, is it ever enough? I know the game is far from perfect, and it simply cannot be perfect.. But I would plea for patience.. BIS is working on it. And whatever content they add, it essentially is their game, and ours to play by choice.

Edited November 27, 2013 by Thani '82

[antoineflemming 14]

Well' date=' if you wish to turn against your former ally, you better come prepared, right?

That means getting your hands on decent equipment, and who says the AAF merely have the current two islands as their domain?? What if BIS decides to eventually add a few other islands/maps to that? Who's to say that content being released soon isn't going to be useful later? All the more choice model-wise right? That is if we're talking modding standard A3 ofcourse.. I for one welcome it. And no doubt all the content that is due will be seen throughout the course of the coming two campaigns. So complain a bit less please, BIS even release it for free..! (or at a game-buyers price, without an extra sum of money charged if you will.) And it begs the question, is it ever enough? I know the game is far from perfect, and it simply cannot be perfect.. But I would plea for patience.. BIS is working on it. And whatever content they add, it essentially is their game, and ours to play by choice.[/quote']

It's just the two islands... If anything, CSAT would have provided the AAF with the main battle tank. What the second episode will show is that CSAT has been on Altis already, preparing for the invasion of Stratis. The AAF were simply preparing the groundwork for a CSAT invasion of the island. That's why CSAT flies in at the end of Survive.

[mistyronin 1181]

Isn't the AAF supposed to be similar to the Armed Forces of Malta?

Why the heck are they getting NATO gear? They feel like generic faction 3 with weapons that are equal to that of two super powers.

Why the heck do they need a tank as well? They control two small islands. No point in the AAF owning modern battle tanks that they shouldn't be able to afford.

About the helicopter, it would make perfectly sense, more than the Mohawk in fact. The new "Hellcat" which is based in a helicopter used today in some european countries ( specially in the navys ), is the perfect one to patrol Altis waters and coast, and would make perfectly sense to me that the AAF bought it second hand from another country ( after all is quite common for small. Ountries like Altis or Malta ).

And is more logical that the AAF operate small tactical helis with weapons, than an unarmed heavy transport helicopter.

About a Tank, much of the european small countries have a few MBT, I guess that specially in Altis situation ( post civil war ) makes sense. And I guess was also to balance the game a bit with the other parts.

[RSF TheCapulet 59]

It's just the two islands... If anything, CSAT would have provided the AAF with the main battle tank. What the second episode will show is that CSAT has been on Altis already, preparing for the invasion of Stratis. The AAF were simply preparing the groundwork for a CSAT invasion of the island. That's why CSAT flies in at the end of Survive.

Or they were instigating a response from NATO as to move opposition out of the pacific region so that CSAT can have more freedom.

[antoineflemming 14]

Or they were instigating a response from NATO as to move opposition out of the pacific region so that CSAT can have more freedom.

Betting on my hypothesis, but the invasion could be because of that. Because, we all know, in an alliance with Russia, China, and Iran, China or Russia would definitely be calling the shots, not Iran. It's probably to kick off a two-front war on NATO's weak side (since the US is preoccupied in the Pacific). I honestly wasn't surprised that CSAT showed up at the end, because the devs talked too much about the campaign last year. Already mentioned defending Stratis against Iranian invasion. But back on topic, even if the AAF aren't supposed to be well-supplied (having a Greek connection would have explained their resources and hardware but oh well), the Iranians on Altis would have supplied them with stuff anyway, including an MBT. Besides, they're already in an economic agreement. So they'd be able to afford the stuff.

I think people are still expecting a sort of asymmetrical warfare situation where the NATO enemy is undersupplied. Get out of that mindset, and you can begin to accept that the AAF are pretty well supplied. Again, would make more sense if they'd have formerly been Greek, but oh well.

[Tonci87 163]

I hope the new MBT is some kind of modernized T-72.

Would make sense for a small country like that. Maybe a Degman? (Hope)

[goldenfiver 11]

Calm yourself. Their just adding a bit of PUNCH to the AAF forces. An Attack/Transport helo is something AAF kinda needs. I like the AAF. But besides that, the good stuff REALLY comes when the second episode is released.

Actually, the next part of the campaign is due december. It's kinda solid imo that those vehicles will be added with that patch.

[Sniperwolf572 758]

[james2464 177]

Nice find! Looks really good!

[gliptal 25]

Very nice camo.

Yay!

[roberthammer 582]

Hmm it seems the AAF tank is South Korean XK2 Black Panther

[ei8ght 11]

why did the lynx linx it is really horrible ?

and MTB is just a leopard 2a7 +

http://www.kliprix.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Leopard-2A7-3.JPG

I think why it's really a very good choice for the tank but against the devs of arma3 do not really like helicopters after the Mi-28/Ka-50/Mi-24 mixed now we have a lynx with uh-1 pads.

AW159 Wildcat

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2b/TA_Reservist_Ground_Crews_Training_with_the_New_Wildcat_Helicopter_for_the_First_Time_MOD_45154290.jpg

Lynx with pads

http://www.militaryaircraft.de/pictures/military/helicopter/Lynx/Lynx_ZD284_RIAT2010_2271_800.jpg

[f27sharps 1]

It's a Singapour Leopard 2SG

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4014/4698723595_049092bcea_b.jpg

[roberthammer 582]

why did the lynx linx it is really horrible ?

and MTB is just a leopard 2a7 +

Good eye - its MBT Revolution , which is based on Leopard 2

[papanowel 120]

why did the lynx linx it is really horrible ?

Maybe because the picture is resize, it looks flat.

[roberthammer 582]

If you want see the IFV and the lynx - look here > http://www.arma2.com/arma-2-baf/arma-2-baf-vehicles.html

[NeuroFunker 11]

Well' date=' if you wish to turn against your former ally, you better come prepared, right?

That means getting your hands on decent equipment, and who says the AAF merely have the current two islands as their domain?? What if BIS decides to eventually add a few other islands/maps to that? Who's to say that content being released soon isn't going to be useful later? All the more choice model-wise right? That is if we're talking modding standard A3 ofcourse.. I for one welcome it. And no doubt all the content that is due will be seen throughout the course of the coming two campaigns. So complain a bit less please, BIS even release it for free..! (or at a game-buyers price, without an extra sum of money charged if you will.) And it begs the question, is it ever enough? I know the game is far from perfect, and it simply cannot be perfect.. But I would plea for patience.. BIS is working on it. And whatever content they add, it essentially is their game, and ours to play by choice.[/quote']

waaaait, people were complaining about "lack of conent in arma 3", now they do complain about addional content as well? Is that ever geting old?

[antoineflemming 14]

waaaait, people were complaining about "lack of conent in arma 3", now they do complain about addional content as well? Is that ever geting old?

It's because people wanted additional content for BLUFOR/OPFOR.

[Alwarren 2767]

It's because people wanted additional content for BLUFOR/OPFOR.

It might also be that people are a bit tired of seeing recycled assets. It's not only all the Merkava-based armour and same turret on all vehicles, it's also recycled assets from Arma 2. A lynx with skids looks weird, and IMO breaks immersion. Seeing real-life vehicles under different names is weird. That is why people complain.

TBH, I wouldn't mind recycled assets from Arma 2 if they were called Warrior, Lynx, etc. I dislike the mash-ups.

[NeuroFunker 11]

as i remember, many people who complained about lack of content in arma 3, said, they wish bis would used all arma 2 conent instead. So BIS does, now they still arent happy.

[antoineflemming 14]

as i remember, many people who complained about lack of content in arma 3, said, they wish bis would used all arma 2 conent instead. So BIS does, now they still arent happy.

People did ask for some more contemporary stuff, and they're getting it, but I think they expected and wanted that to be for BLUFOR, and not the AAF.

[Rovka 14]

The vehicles are only meant to be loosely based on their real life counterparts where applicable.. For example: A M2A1 Slammer essentially is a downgraded Merkava IV, because like the Russians did with their downgraded export models of say T-72, the Israëli's were likely to save the best parts for their own tanks to have an edge in combat capability just in case they had to fight a licence-build Merkava.. That's why Slammer isn't called Merkava, and shouldn't be treated as if it was a 1:1 copy of said vehicle either.. I think it's safe to say the same could be said for various other vehicles BIS had introduced, or is about to bring into their game..

And I know it's mainly an infantry based game, but especially with infantry around the vehicles, situational awareness should be decent at all times! Otherwise it's guessing if you'd not run over one of your teammates taking cover behind or besides your vehicle....

And to elaborate, helo's for one don't have a mere frontal-view with HUD for show either? So why do armored vehicles feel so left behind? Multiple viewports on model should be visible and working ports/windows from within drivers-position.. Or atleast, I hope one day BIS gets rid of their lousy single-window syndrome.. That's all the things that I have to complain about.

Edited November 27, 2013 by Thani '82

[NeuroFunker 11]

People did ask for some more contemporary stuff, and they're getting it, but I think they expected and wanted that to be for BLUFOR, and not the AAF.

well, 2 jets still to come. Greenfor is really now underpowered, only the jet probably balancing it out. So Why would an islnd like Altis, not have an MBT and IPV?

---------- Post added at 17:43 ---------- Previous post was at 17:40 ----------

The vehicles are only meant to be loosely based on their real life counterparts where applicable.. For example: A M2A1 Slammer essentially is a downgraded Merkava IV' date=' because like the Russians did with their downgraded export models of say T-72, the Israëli's were likely to save the best parts for their own tanks to have an edge in combat capability just in case they had to fight a licence-build Merkava.. That's why Slammer isn't called Merkava, and shouldn't be treated as if it was a 1:1 copy of said vehicle either.. I think it's safe to say the same could be said for various other vehicles BIS had introduced, or is about to bring into their game..

And I know it's mainly an infantry based game, but especially with infantry around the vehicles, situational awareness should be decent at all times! Otherwise it's guessing if you'd not run over one of your teammates taking cover behind or besides your vehicle....

And to elaborate, helo's for one don't have a mere frontal-view with HUD for show either? So why do armored vehicles feel so left behind? Multiple viewports on model should be visible and working ports/windows from within drivers-position.. Or atleast, I hope one day BIS gets rid of their lousy single-window syndrome.. That's all the things that I have to complain about.[/quote']

i believe in one of beat builds, there were some apc cockpits, also openable doors on ifrit, have even screens on it on my steam profile. I guess they are working on it, still 2 years ahed to work on arma 3 as they said. Just have to wait.

[ziiip 1]

as i remember, many people who complained about lack of content in arma 3, said, they wish bis would used all arma 2 conent instead. So BIS does, now they still arent happy.

Hint: the people complain about x are not necessarily the same who complain about y.

I personally like the ArmA2 recycled stuff. They look great so why not use them? Besides, the balance between old and new assets is good now.

[Rovka 14]

Yes, true that as far as the waiting-game goes. But in the end, I believe it'll be worth it. :)