Development Blog & Reveals

[Alwarren 2767]

More paid DLC? ;) Seeing as that is what you quoted...

Why not? For Skyrim, I would have wanted more as well. If I enjoy a game, why would I not want more stuff for it? And I don't have a problem with paying for it, if it is worth it. So far, BIS always made sure that a new DLC didn't split the community if you didn't buy it, so I'd say bring it on.

[dnk 13]

Eh, given the relative lack of assets in the current game, I feel like we're due for a bit more unpaid DLC/updates before having to pay for something new.

[chortles 263]

Eh, given the relative lack of assets in the current game, I feel like we're due for a bit more unpaid DLC/updates before having to pay for something new.

Thing is, we already know that further DLC/updates are already 'in the pipeline', it's just a matter of the how-and-when they appear, i.e. as part of the "ADAPT" or "WIN" free DLC/patches/updates or in separate patches.

[NeuroFunker 11]

mst likekely, after adapt and win episodes will release. Just currious, what next island it could be? Something tells me it could be Iran, or some mid east area.

[slatts 1978]

I'm guessing/hoping/praying the model assets get released tomorrow?

[progamer 14]

Does anyone think that the whole making the game less clunky and more accessible is also coming with making the game a lot more balanced than Arma 2? Back in Arma 2 it would have been basically treason to have something like "balanced loadouts" in an update. But now in Arma 3 that is happening from time to time. Its turning toward just being a hardcore arcade game more than a realistic game. It seems like they want to draw in those hardcore Battlefield and COD players who still like a balanced game.

The three factions have the exact same names for the infantry and the exact same infantry classes. They are basically generic faction 1, 2 and 3 with unrealistically balanced weaponry and random vehicles.

Edited December 3, 2013 by ProGamer

[chortles 263]

I'm guessing/hoping/praying the model assets get released tomorrow?

It's supposed to be some time this week, so I wouldn't panic until Saturday goes by with nothing to show for it... just 'aim' at Saturday, and let anytime before that be a pleasant surprise. :D

[slatts 1978]

Does anyone think that the whole making the game less clunky and more accessible is also coming with making the game a lot more balanced than Arma 2? Back in Arma 2 it would have been basically treason to have something like "balanced loadouts" in an update. But now in Arma 3 that is happening from time to time. Its turning toward just being a hardcore arcade game more than a realistic game. It seems like they want to draw in those hardcore Battlefield and COD players who still like a balanced game.

The three factions have the exact same names for the infantry and the exact same infantry classes. They are basically generic faction 1, 2 and 3 with unrealistically balanced weaponry and random vehicles.

Nope. Back in Arma 2 both sides have practically the same weapon with the same attachments. Damage values were slightly different but only by a tiny amount (M16/AK107) and each group had really the same loadouts.

Only Arrowhead brought any major imba! when TI was introduced. But remember..even the Takis had thermal scopes. Just not lasers.

[Elutheral 10]

Only Arrowhead brought any major imba! when TI was introduced. But remember..even the Takis had thermal scopes. Just not lasers.

I remember picking up the ak with a thermal on it for the first time... I loled at its ridiculousness.

[-Gews- 1]

Does anyone think that the whole making the game less clunky and more accessible is also coming with making the game a lot more balanced than Arma 2?

Well, remember this interview?

"And the rest is mainly about balancing countermeasures on several levels – armies, units, their strengths and weaknesses. If you compare for example the Ifrit with the Hunter (faster, but less resistant), they are quite different, but still balanced - even in 1-on-1 engagements. The Red and Green armies aren't just a plain mirror of each other, but the conflict isn't as asymmetric as it used to be for example in Arrowhead."

"Each army should have weak points and strengths. Even more so for the ‘Green’ army (Beta leak). We still think that all sides should be distinguishable yet balanced."

http://www.arma3.com/news/report-in-petr-kolar-encoding

I say leave balance to the mission maker (ie, don't put an Abrams vs some guys with AKs!), in a perfect world ArmA should be about creating a true-to-life experience and attempting to closely replicate the performance of the different weapons systems.

[dnk 13]

The three factions have the exact same names for the infantry and the exact same infantry classes. They are basically generic faction 1, 2 and 3 with unrealistically balanced weaponry and random vehicles.

Well, the fictional universe is one where the Iranians have continued to advance while the West has stagnated and both sides have reached a rough parity. Having a rough balance therefore is expected. You have to look at this game as more of a Russia-USA matchup as in A2, than Insurgent-USA as in OA.

They'd need to have more assets in the game to start imbalancing things, otherwise players would complain that one side is missing an X.

[NeuroFunker 11]

They'd need to have more assets in the game to start imbalancing things, otherwise players would complain that one side is missing an X.

lol thats the thing, which always will be - no matter if BI done anything in one and another way, people would complain. And i don't believe, if all factions were pretty much unbalanced, there would be less complains about it. At the end, BIS would be forced to balance things out similar to what we got right now, and people who were pleased with unbalanced game setting, would start complain like now.

Some people like blonde, some brunette, you can't make a game like arma, what pleases everyone at same time

[Elutheral 10]

lSome people like blonde, some brunette, you can't make a game like arma, what pleases everyone at same time

Yup sure wish people would quit acting butthurt that the feature they wanted isn't in the game.

I say leave balance to the mission maker (ie, don't put an Abrams vs some guys with AKs!), in a perfect world ArmA should be about creating a true-to-life experience and attempting to closely replicate the performance of the different weapons systems.

Agreed.

BTW can anyone provide me with a link to the black mx rifles that came out on dev the other day?

Edited December 3, 2013 by Elutheral

[Alwarren 2767]

lol thats the thing, which always will be - no matter if BI done anything in one and another way, people would complain. And i don't believe, if all factions were pretty much unbalanced, there would be less complains about it. At the end, BIS would be forced to balance things out similar to what we got right now, and people who were pleased with unbalanced game setting, would start complain like now.

Some people like blonde, some brunette, you can't make a game like arma, what pleases everyone at same time

You know, it's kind of sad to see that you preach on one hand that the pessimists repeat their threads over and over and are guilty of the same repetition. You don't leave out any possibility to bitch at the "pessimists", don't you?

---------- Post added at 11:24 ---------- Previous post was at 11:22 ----------

Well, the fictional universe is one where the Iranians have continued to advance while the West has stagnated and both sides have reached a rough parity. Having a rough balance therefore is expected. You have to look at this game as more of a Russia-USA matchup as in A2, than Insurgent-USA as in OA.

They'd need to have more assets in the game to start imbalancing things, otherwise players would complain that one side is missing an X.

Personally, what annoys me about the whole balancing is that it is done the cheapest way possible, namely by making everything more or less the same. Starcraft managed to create a balanced game with three completely different factions. That's hard to do of course, but in the end, it will look and feel more real than having each machine gunner run around with exactly the same ammo count.

Don't get me wrong, balance in itself isn't a bad thing. But this kind of balance looks like the easy way out.

[danil-ch 165]

each machine gunner run around with exactly the same ammo count.

It's been this way since ofp. But no one complain about it until BIS mentioned it. Why:confused:

[13islucky 10]

It's been this way since ofp. But no one complain about it until BIS mentioned it. Why:confused:

I suppose it's a lot more obvious now than it was back then.

[danil-ch 165]

I suppose it's a lot more obvious now than it was back then.

Really?

OFP: US machine gunner (100 bullets - 5 mags) RU machine gunner (100 bullets - 5 mags)

ArmA 1: US machine gunner (100 bullets - 5 mags) SLA machine gunner (100 bullets - 5 mags)

ArmA 2: US machine gunner (100 bullets - 5 mags) RU machine gunner (100 bullets - 5 mags)

[progamer 14]

It's the fact that they said they wanted Arma 3 to be a balanced game. Why the factions so generic and similar. It's why the MRAPs have a big gas tanks sticking out of them for you too shoot. Or why a MRAP goes down after one clip. It's just stupid. Weapons still have missing calibers.

Edited December 3, 2013 by ProGamer

[L3TUC3 32]

It's the fact that they said they wanted Arma 3 to be a balanced game. Why the factions so generic and similar. It's why the MRAPs have a big gas tanks sticking out of them for you too shoot. Or why a MRAP goes down after one clip. It's just stupid. Weapons still have missing calibers.

Really? You're imagining things.

I don't think the factions are all that generic, they all have their own distinct look and feel. Similar, yes, but as has been stated quite a few over there simply wasn't enough time for more assets so we're stuck with copypasted RCSW turrets and the likes.

MRAPS with big gas tanks sticking out was done because of balancing? That doesn't make any sense. The ease of destruction is a holdover from the localized HP system that has been with OFP since forever. The ballistics/penetration system and values aren't done yet and BIS after all these years still needs to find a way to more properly simulate damage on vehicles. It's a RV engine deficiency that sorely needs attention. Also, the gastank sticking out on the Ifrit could actually be a flaw in the original design. Ever think of it that way? It's unlikely considering the same results happen on other vehicles with non-exposed gastanks, but still. I don't agree on the current state with the ease of destruction by merely focusing fire on a few weak points with the default weapons, but I highly doubt this is intended by BIS. I don't think we'll see any improvement on it until the new material penetration values are done.

[Smurf 12]

New Arma 3 campaign episode available on January 21

Bohemia Interactive today announced the release date of the second campaign episode for Arma 3. Picking up from where the first episode left off, the campaign is set to continue with the release of the ‘Adapt’ episode on Tuesday January 21st, 2014.

The official campaign for Arma 3, named ‘The East Wind’, unfolds over three episodes: 'Survive', 'Adapt', 'Win'. In the first episode, players were introduced to Ben Kerry, a regular soldier who’s part of a NATO-peacekeeping mission in the Mediterranean. After a botched withdrawal trapped Kerry’s unit on the island of Stratis, in the midst of a flashpoint, they attempt an escape to the neighboring island of Altis.

"While the first part of the campaign focused on the basics of infantry combat, this second ‘Adapt’ episode plays with the other cool features of Arma 3’s sandboxâ€, said Jaroslav Kasny, Playable Content Lead for Arma 3. "Players will find more open and unorthodox scenarios, and with the help of guerrilla warfare, set out to defeat a much stronger enemy."

Before the upcoming holidays, ahead of the second episode’s launch, Bohemia Interactive will already be releasing the episode’s new sandbox content. Included in this (free) package are 3 additional vehicles for the Altis Armed Forces faction. The Wy-55 Hellcat helicopter has previously seen action with the British Armed Forces, and now provides a maneuverable and armed aerial reconnaissance platform for the AAF. The FV-720 Mora is a tracked Infantry Fighting Vehicle best employed in combined arms warfare. Last but not certainly least, we find the fully new MBT-52 tank, brought in to the round out the faction's war fighting options. The vehicles, plus other new content such as black versions of the MX rifle family, infra-red grenades and the LRPS sniper scope, will be made available on Wednesday December 11th via an automatic update on Steam.

[roberthammer 582]

^> http://www.arma3.com/news/second-campaing-episode-for-arma3-available-on-january-21#.Up9PddLuKJs

and the next main branch update will be on Wednesday December 11th

[papanowel 120]

An other delay... It was supposed to come this month.

I hope this one will be a bit longer than the previous episode.

[Wiki 1558]

another delay...

[Smurf 12]

It was suppose to come out this month? Really don't think so.

[-ghost-tf 12]

It was suppose to come out this month? Really don't think so.

It was. They mentioned in one of the past sitreps that it would come end of december, but I dont mind when they release it as long as it comes with a new medical system :)