Comparison picture album : Lemnos - ArmA3

[arigram 0]

If a companion island was going to be included with Lemnos, then Agios Eustratios would have been the only that made sense. After all, it falls under the administration of Lemnos.

In any case, if BI has recreated the Greek environment, they could well pick any of the countless small islets and rocks that dot the Aegean seascape or make up one of their own. It doesn't have to be attached to the Lemnos map anyway.

[metalcraze 290]

Buchta said there will be only 1 island in the recent interview.

I dont see how its worse gameplay because it doesnt have many forests.

Because much like with Takistan it will be a game of snipers and javelins again.

Except the difference is whereas Takistan had mountains all the time - Lemnos is quite flat in comparison

[Derbysieger 11]

Ivan stated in the interview that there won't be a small island like Utes for Arma 3. So the discussion is pointless.

I'd wait until we now more. It'd be awesome if Limnos has the same detailed micro terrain as Proving Grounds but I doubt that it will happen

[dmarkwick 261]

Ivan stated in the interview that there won't be a small island like Utes for Arma 3. So the discussion is pointless.

I'd wait until we now more. It'd be awesome if Limnos has the same detailed micro terrain as Proving Grounds but I doubt that it will happen

Well the discussion is not pointless, we know the devs regularly read these forums. If we make a good enough case for it, I'm sure it will be considered :)

Heck, even just including Utes again will be fine.

[Derbysieger 11]

Ok you're right ;)

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Yeah, let's hope. I agree slightly modified Utes (to use new models and possibly config entries) would be just fine. Perfect in fact, as it is also big enough to try out more complex ideas. And it loads pretty much instantly.

And viewdistance need not encompass the entire Lemnos island.

Problem is a max VD of 20km, and Lemnos being 30km wide (not everything landmass). A Kamov over the airport and you'll cover everything.

Another problem is that units put into suppression mode may fire from far beyond any artificial limitations such as VD and weather based view limitations. I realize some of this has to be addressed by the mission maker, but I have a hard time coming up with solutions. Even making up the needed fog/rain tables is messy to work out. Try Domino (not Domination) to see what I'm talking about; With VD due fog being 500m, you'll still get suppressed by big guns from far beyond this visibility. Fun, yes, but completely unrealistic.

Edited August 3, 2011 by CarlGustaffa

[Derbysieger 11]

Well it's not THAT much different with Arma 2. 10km VD doesn't mean you know every unit on the map even if you're high enough to oversee the whole map. The radar only shows units up to a certain range and object draw distance is lower than 10km.. I'm sure BIS will not make one type of unit so strong that it will instantly control the whole island once airborne; also 400km² of landmass is almost twice as much as Chernarus.

[maturin 12]

Problem is a max VD of 20km, and Lemnos being 30km wide (not everything landmass). A Kamov over the airport and you'll cover everything.

True, but who the heck actually plays at 10km VD now?

Another problem is that units put into suppression mode may fire from far beyond any artificial limitations such as VD and weather based view limitations. I realize some of this has to be addressed by the mission maker, but I have a hard time coming up with solutions. Even making up the needed fog/rain tables is messy to work out. Try Domino (not Domination) to see what I'm talking about; With VD due fog being 500m, you'll still get suppressed by big guns from far beyond this visibility. Fun, yes, but completely unrealistic.

Shouldn't we assume that BIS will bind spotting distance to view distance?

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Pilots?

Spotting distance may already be accounted for (ability to spot new things). Problem is in the suppressing mechanics, where they can suppress with extreme accuracy and updating positioning as long as they have line of sight. To server AI units doing suppressive fire, their view distance (due weather) has no impact.

[Derbysieger 11]

Yeah I'm actually one of these people who play @10km VD when flying around^^ For infantry combat I reduce that to 4-7km VD depending on the map/mission though. When Arma 3 comes out I hope to be able to play with 20km VD after upgrading my graphicscard xD

[rye1 21]

True, but who the heck actually plays at 10km VD now?

Me... and I'm on a laptop.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Same, desktop, however.

[dmarkwick 261]

Pilots?

Spotting distance may already be accounted for (ability to spot new things). Problem is in the suppressing mechanics, where they can suppress with extreme accuracy and updating positioning as long as they have line of sight. To server AI units doing suppressive fire, their view distance (due weather) has no impact.

Why is this a new problem that Chernarus for example doesn't have? In any case, view distances can be reduced for gameplay.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Suppressive fire was new to OA (or in an Arma2 patch, a bit unsure). And Chernarus has tons of heavy forests to hide in or near. I'm not sure if AI will fire beyond their normal engagement range, but they will fire beyond their visibility range.

As for mission design, I used a max VD of 5000 in Domino, as the typical bad weather (bad visibility due fog, rain, and duststorms when windy) and being heavily focused on ground operations (no apaches or jets on our side) didn't in any way warrant 10000. Joining a server that hosted it, I found they've changed the mission to allow up to 10000 :p And then there are addons that allows players to set freely (mission don't attempt to block them).

Just fire up googleearth or FSX to see how it appears. Of course A3 will host a denser island than those two, and have more trees. But yeah, from what I can see from an elevated position, I'm getting a bit worried. Hopefully for no reason, I might add.

Should the island utilize "extended vertical stretching" (like googleearth can do) to produce more natural cover? At 2x, we get maximum height of about 800 (by which the particle and lighting engine in OA already fails badly), but the majority of land would still be in the 50-400 meter range.

[dmarkwick 261]

Suppressive fire was new to OA (or in an Arma2 patch, a bit unsure). And Chernarus has tons of heavy forests to hide in or near. I'm not sure if AI will fire beyond their normal engagement range, but they will fire beyond their visibility range.

As for mission design, I used a max VD of 5000 in Domino, as the typical bad weather (bad visibility due fog, rain, and duststorms when windy) and being heavily focused on ground operations (no apaches or jets on our side) didn't in any way warrant 10000. Joining a server that hosted it, I found they've changed the mission to allow up to 10000 :p And then there are addons that allows players to set freely (mission don't attempt to block them).

Just fire up googleearth or FSX to see how it appears. Of course A3 will host a denser island than those two, and have more trees. But yeah, from what I can see from an elevated position, I'm getting a bit worried. Hopefully for no reason, I might add.

Should the island utilize "extended vertical stretching" (like googleearth can do) to produce more natural cover? At 2x, we get maximum height of about 800 (by which the particle and lighting engine in OA already fails badly), but the majority of land would still be in the 50-400 meter range.

Then it sounds to me like it's all down to mission content. People artificially raising the VD is simply something they decided to do, if it breaks the mission so what? But in any case I cannot see how a helo could hold reign over an entire island unless the mission content allowed it.

[Tonci87 163]

Well you guys know that there will be AA weapons? If someone thinks that he can control the battlefield from a high flying plane, then send him some AA rockets.

Rule Nr 1:

If ypu can see evetyone, then most likely everyone can see you too

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Well that's the issue. Manpads will be so far away choppers reaction time will always work in his favor. And it's impossible to get close enough with vehicles (Shilka like) without being blown to pieces.

In Arma2, russians had the Kamov and the Tunguska, and there were lots of complaints about how that affected balance. In OA there are many ways to hide your approach, while from what I've seen so far, Arma3 will be much more in the open. Sure, everyone will be able to see the chopper as well, but only the chopper will be in range to fire. And nobody will be able to approach the chopper to do something about it before getting shot up.

Don't get me wrong, I do like offset balancing wrt not having equal capabilities in all areas. Anyhow, I was just trying to flag the issue, and hopefully the devs will have it in mind and somehow try to compensate, by means of equipment or terrain editing, although I dont' expect the terrain to change by much at this time.

[arigram 0]

I took screenshots from the Cynical Brit video interview at the point of comparison between real snapshots and virtual recreation of the island.

1.

2.

3.

My commentary?

Number 2's recreation doesn't match the photograph due having far less vegetation. Its not that they have to be perfect copies (after all, it will be in the future) but it looks much duller without that rich environment.

Number 1 and especially Number 3 highlights a terrain engine limitation that I was afraid of: the hills are smooth and curve softly down instead of having harsh rocky cliffs of sharp angles. Unfortunately its a common trait of the Greek island landscape and (at least for those in the know) lose much of the authenticity of recreation. Its one of the distinct features that I compare to other landscapes around the world.

I don't see any micro-terrain variations. It seems that the terrain resolution is similar to Arma 2.

Edited August 19, 2011 by arigram

[metalcraze 290]

Number 2's recreation doesn't match the photograph due having far less vegetation.

And that's the problem. The island lacks forests as it is, no need to make it even more like Takistan.

Number 1 and especially Number 3 highlights a terrain engine limitation that I was afraid of: the hills are smooth and curve softly down instead of having harsh rocky cliffs of sharp angles.

Why do you think it isn't so by design?

There are no such engine limitations that stop you from creating harsher terrain

[Colossus 2]

I might be naive here, but could terrain tessellation "fix it"?

[falcon_565 11]

And that's the problem. The island lacks forests as it is, no need to make it even more like Takistan.

Why do you think it isn't so by design?

There are no such engine limitations that stop you from creating harsher terrain

Well there is, terrain grid mesh size...

[onlyrazor 11]

Well that's the issue. Manpads will be so far away choppers reaction time will always work in his favor. And it's impossible to get close enough with vehicles (Shilka like) without being blown to pieces.

You could always try a tank... :D

[Kilbur 10]

Anyone get this yet :

http://bgphoto.net/photos/14018/o633458434986311631.jpg Please respect the image size rule /Alex.

Edited August 20, 2011 by Alex72

[liquidpinky 11]

Anyone get this yet :

http://bgphoto.net/photos/14018/o633458434986311631.jpg Please respect the image size rule /Alex.

Trucks do 80kmh max and tanks do 60 kmh max speed limit sign.

[Master85 1]

Anyone get this yet :

http://bgphoto.net/photos/14018/o633458434986311631.jpg

looks like a MLC sign - the german article got a few pictures