Is Arma 3 authentic?

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

On Iran using Israeli weapons. It does seem a little far fetched, but I'm sure stranger things have happened in wartime, who knows maybe it's just a Limnos thing?

Meh. We can hope, can't we.

[nodunit 397]

Good thread, hopefully it will stop all the "OMG future weapons aren't realistic!". On Iran using Israeli weapons. It does seem a little far fetched, but I'm sure stranger things have happened in wartime, who knows maybe it's just a Limnos thing? Maybe their just placeholders for now and BIS hasn't created all the Iranian vehicles/weapons yet? Anyway even if the vanilla game comes with Iranians using Israeli weapons for whatever reason I'm betting the ACE team will get onto it and make new weapons/configs like they did for the US Army, etc. in OA.

tl;dr Good thread pure. For the love of god, think of the mods!:)

It's about as far fetched as a small soviet force invading an island then threatening to use nuclear weapons without taking any orders from the Kremlin, or an island in existance having a tropical landmass south of a bridge, with thick and lush European foresty area north of said bridge. Or "Armines" using a mixture of US Army and Marine equipment.

You guys take Arma to being 100% realistic a bit too far, Armaverse is not our universe.

[kremator 1065]

As far as I can see, those that are complaining about arma3 being too futuristic are ones that want 17 zillion retextures of the same uniform/ weapon/ vehicle! We have to learn to ignore them. Why? Because the vast majority of them have about three posts in the forums and seem to think that If they moan enough BIS will drop futuristic weapons.

Either get over it OR delete your account from the forums and NEVER touch a BIS product again!

Good post PurePassion.

[Brutus404 10]

I'm not really sure, but is it even confirmed it is a Tavor used by Iranian troops?

And if it is, it could just as well be an example of industrial espionage, similar to what the Russians did with the Concorde. The Russians didnt care stealing kapitalist plans, even though the mighty Soviet Union with its communism was superior in any way. Same with Iran and the Tavor: steal the design from the Israel, modify it a bit to suit your needs and here you go! Iranian troops using Tavor-like weapons.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Actually, Detcord has a point. Iran would NEVER, and I say, NEVER use "Zionist" technology. That's what they see it as. I don't care if they invaded Israel. They wouldn't use that. They ARE an Islamic Republic. They ARE an Islamic nation, and very much so. The supreme leader, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Hosseini Khamenei, is as much a religious leader as he is a political leader. I don't care what regime change Iran goes through. It'll still be a Muslim nation. And chances are, with this possible new regime starting WW3, this new regime is more radical than the last (as in the present regime). Remember, the Ayatollah won't go away. They won't get rid of him. If there is a regime change, then the Ayatollah will support it (he already doesn't really like Ahmadinejad).

I really don't follow the reasoning. Iran used captured Iraki weapons during Iran/Irak war, and during WW2, Germans made an intensive use of foreign military equipments, some of them being acknowledged as being far better than German ones (French and Czech stuff for example), even if their political regim was thinking that those nations were far inferior.

[CyclonicTuna 87]

If its really not authentic, the ACE team will fix it ;), I'm sure of that. But I also trust in BIS to deliver a realistic experience. And I like the path they have chosen for, its good to offer some variety between the violence of all the modern day mainstream shooters. Its not like their going completely sci-fi. We still need wheels to get us from A to B, and we still need gunpoweder to kill the enemy. Our jets and helicopters are still powered by kerosine, and so far I havn't seen any Halo inspired green and purple armor anywhere. I for once am looking forward to try the new experimental weapons and vehicles.

And like I said, I'm sure that in the end most of the content will be provided by the community. Its likely that we'll go back to desert storm and afghanistan again nevertheless.

[NoRailgunner 0]

A3 could be "authentic" in its own alternate reality but BIS somehow don't like to talk more about the background/idea of this game.

What was so important that Iran/China (OPFOR) and NATO (BLUFOR) went to (world) war? Why could OPFOR win and occupy countries + regions without beeing beaten or slowed down?

Limnos is deep behind enemy lines - why sending and risking an SF + research team to this place?

Maybe Aliens took over Asia and Limnos is build up as FARP/Outpost including some more advanced alien hi-tech facilities or alien R&D, who knows? :D

Must be easier to make a game for casual players who just want to shoot, kill and destroy stuff and don't like to be bothered about the background, reasons and reality/realism.

[paecmaker 23]

@ paecmaker

Oh yes... I was waiting for this one.

It is a common misconception that the German Forces utilized Soviet weapon systems in great numbers, it is based upon uninformed and or lackadaisical stupidity on the part of the individual stating as such. The OKW did indeed appropriate RKKA material, however, said material was only utilized when production in the RPIA was essentially falling apart. In fact, official German and Soviet documents point to a equivalency of Soviet arms (heavy weapon systems) utilized by German forces to equal that of a Battalion level element. Point moot. Feel free to do your own research as the records are readily available online now.

So, unless the Iranians are dying at the cyclic rate and losing, it still doesn't pan out.

Germany did use captured equipment(or designs) from many countries, for example panzer 38(t), the germans adopted the design and started making more themselves, and that was before they started losing(however these are not soviet). I do know that they however used many soviet small arms(as well as the soviets used German small arms)

Here is how Germany used a french light tank, it does show they used things like this.

"The Wehrmacht captured 1,704 FTs. A hundred were again used for airfield defence, about 650 for patrolling occupied Europe. Some of the tanks were also used by the Germans in 1944 for street-fighting in Paris. By this time they were hopelessly out of date."

Edited March 25, 2012 by paecmaker

[Tonci87 163]

MAKE THIS THREAD STICKY!

Nice Thread Pure!

Regarding Iranians not using Zionist Tech: Islamists all around the world don´t have any ideological problems when using the UZI.

[instagoat 133]

A3 could be "authentic" in its own alternate reality but BIS somehow don't like to talk more about the background/idea of this game.

What was so important that Iran/China (OPFOR) and NATO (BLUFOR) went to (world) war? Why could OPFOR win and occupy countries + regions without beeing beaten or slowed down?...

As for the OPFOR not being slowed down, I recently read an article detailing soviet military doctrine (which was -anything- but zerg rush tactics) in detail. I can try to find it again, but I don´t recall where I saw it. At any rate, the summary was that while the western military doctrine relies on individual (theater scale) units which rely on well planned defense and assault, and individual unit prowess, enormous training and equipment expenses, the OPFOR doctrine actually assumes that units will only perform average, and will always have backups. If I recall right, the article said something about 2 replacement formations for every single frontline formation being in place, ready to move forward in case the frontline formation gets ground down below combat capacity.

It´s a really pragmatic approach, which a scientifically planned and prepared operational layout and plan. The soviets didn´t really discourage individual initiative, but they also didn´t really assume it to be the dealbreaker it was generally assumed in the west. (This fallacy was ripe with the british and american military intelligence services. I read a bundeswehr article written by a couple of officers, detailing how the german command in WW1 was really a team effort with no single officer really being the single cause of any plan. In the west, meanwhile, these plans became known by the names of their supposed creators (which were, in fact, often not really the sole creators at all.))

The chinese military takes a lot from soviet doctrine, and contrary to the soviets, they actually have a lot of actual combat experience to build on. (Korea, Vietnam, border clashes with India, a short war with the SU itself, etc.) The iranian military, I don´t know about, but I would imagine that they would act more like a blufor doctrine trained army than a redfor.

In general, though, depending on the force dispositions, It seems that it can be entirely possible for the SCO forces, which among others include Russia, China and Iran to completely overwhelm the european NATO contingents, which have been completely transformed from field armies to counter-insurgency forces in the past 10 years, and also downsized by -massive- margins. Mid-term, for example, the Bundeswehr will continue to downsize in the process of becoming an all-volounteer military. I am not sure how many, but I remember hearing that something like (out of 200 ish) bases, 80 will be closed until 2020. I am not up to date on this, so I may be wrong.

If REDFOR also had the surprise advantage and lots of good luck, they´d be driving the NATO forces before them.

But I assume they haven´t: The War started in 2021, and by Arma 3 it is already 2035! That means the war has been going on for 14 years!!! That´s hardly sounding like the OPFOR forces had no trouble invading europe. WW2 was a long and extremely hard war, and it was MUCH slower paced than a modern global war would be, and it only lasted 6 years proper (unless you count the spanish civil war and the war in china as part of the conflict.). In fact, the length of the war is something I find pretty hard to believe, as far as canon goes.

Food for thought right there.

[Messiah 2]

@ Messiah

BAF huh? Nicely avoiding the remainder of the models in ArmA, ArmA II, and OA. Good job deflecting, you should be a politician. For your edification, all of the vehicle models from BAF are from said mil-sim. I'd be more than happy to show you RPAT for RPAT if need be. Furthermore, to avoid said licensing constraints (which has been done in the past), all that is needed is to change a rivet here and there, an optical sights preclusion, a CSW, or any facet thereof. I've been with this series since 2001, I've been modding since 2006, and I've owned said military version of ArmA since 2009. I do think I've got a decent handle on things, mate.

I'm not sure why you insist on the hostile tone. And of course, there are many crossovers, but all I wanted to state was that its not always as simple as just picking and choosing what you fancy, no intention of deflection. But to reply in a similarly belligerent tone on the subject of BAF:

The british vehicles are not from VBS2, the memorandum of agreement I have in my hand reflects that fact. They may have borrwed items here and there, a point of contention on my part. I made half of the VBS2 british content, so regardless of your 'many years' owning the systems, I wager I've owned and been modding them far longer, and have a 'decent handle' on what is being used... mate.

Edited March 25, 2012 by Messiah

[Tonci87 163]

Yeah a 14 years war seems very long. But maybe there has been ceasefire agreements that lasted for a few years?

[magnus28 1]

You know the only thing that bothers me so far about this game is both MBT's for opfor and blufor is the Merkava. Granted there's some other tank with a railgun mounted on it but I don't like the idea of both main factions sharing weaponry, particularly armor with the same thermal signatures, silhouettes and all (yeah there's a camo difference but in some conditions that could be hard to identify). I have a hard time believing NATO couldn't adopt (assuming BIS is tired of the Abrams) the Challenger or the Leopard, esepcially the Leopard which gets no love these days from games :( .

Yes The Leopard 2 is by far the most sophisticated and deadly MBT on the battlefield. They used to share the exact same gun, and turret as the Abrams, but now the only thing in common is they fire the same gun (made by the same German Manufacturer), However, the Leo 2 has a far better targeting system, and doesn't get bogged down in marshes like the M1 does. The Leo 2 A6, is also a newer design, has better suspension, and a better Power to weight ratio. These are not only facts, but coming from a guy still active in the Armour Corps who has done more that just compared the 2 together on paper.

where is the F*Ing Leopard 2 Love BIS?

[Messiah 2]

Yes The Leopard 2 is by far the most sophisticated and deadly MBT on the battlefield. They used to share the exact same gun, and turret as the Abrams, but now the only thing in common is they fire the same gun (made by the same German Manufacturer), However, the Leo 2 has a far better targeting system, and doesn't get bogged down in marshes like the M1 does. The Leo 2 A6, is also a newer design, has better suspension, and a better Power to weight ratio. These are not only facts, but coming from a guy still active in the Armour Corps who has done more that just compared the 2 together on paper.

where is the F*Ing Leopard 2 Love BIS?

Note the time frame of A3, then consider the realistic future of MBTs in the way we fight wars these days? I recall reading that the US Military went to congress to ask them not to invest in a new MBT, the British aren't looking to in a new MBT after the CR2 dies a natural death. The merkeva is also a troop carrier, so its useful life far extends that of a traditional MBT.

[magnus28 1]

you have a point Messiah, and despite me being in the Armour Corps, I would have to agree that the "tank" is outdated. You could have someone blow up a tank with the press of a button from a laptop - from about 100 miles away.

That being said, Arma 3 is still a game, a War game. And people always put tanks in combat sims no matter what. So if a "Tank" should be represented on the Coalition side, it should be some modern Western tank, not some israeli piece of crap. Don't get me wrong, not trashing the Merkeva, but compared to the Leclerc,Abrams,Challenger,Leo,T90, it's not even in the top 5 - nor should it be.

[Messiah 2]

Of course people expect certain things from a milsim, and rightly so, but in staying true to their storyline, its going to be difficult at best for them to work in another 'modern' MBT. DLC's perhaps.

[NoRailgunner 0]

@InstaGoat there is still no reason why any A3 faction should start or support a world war. What would be a reasonable gain for Blufor or Opfor at what price?

IIRC even today its very hard to deploy troops in large quantities and stay undetected so the possibility of Iran using "Blitzkrieg" or "zerg rush" strategy in 2021 isn't going to happen that likely. Thought in 2025 Iranian Forces invade Limnos and moved on....

Something important must be on this Greek island in 07/2035, enough to send + risk a NATO SF and research team deep behind enemy lines??

Wild guess: it will be a "game changer" and anyone in A3 who is able to control or destroy it will be legend. Lets see how BIS is connecting alternate A3 versum with real world or if A3 will be just another "awesome" fictional game universe on its own. :)

[spotter001 82]

Great work there PurePassion! especially concerning the "car", "butterfly" and "moccasins" issues:):)

seriously, thanks for ur effort, i didn't know about those MBT and APCs.

okay, i have no problem with Merkava at all. it looks so damn cool and more stylish, stealthy and fancy than other MBTs. and stop moaning about Challenger and that German tank. i don't give a f*** about them. Merkava looks good enough to be in game and i praise BIS for their choice. so stop bitching all u armchair generals cause this is a game afterall.

as someone already mentioned, ACE guys will re-do the game again.

[paecmaker 23]

Great work there PurePassion! especially concerning the "car", "butterfly" and "moccasins" issues:):)

seriously, thanks for ur effort, i didn't know about those MBT and APCs.

okay, i have no problem with Merkava at all. it looks so damn cool and more stylish, stealthy and fancy than other MBTs. and stop moaning about Challenger and that German tank. i don't give a f*** about them. Merkava looks good enough to be in game and i praise BIS for their choice. so stop bitching all u armchair generals cause this is a game afterall.

as someone already mentioned, ACE guys will re-do the game again.

You may not give a f*** about them but others do, I like the merkava but its still a bit bad that both of the main factions are using them.

[magnus28 1]

hey spotter, if you don't care much for realism or details, and you adopt the "looks good enough for me" attitude, then why don't you go play modern warfare and leave the realism sim for the big boys okay? Because you only speak for yourself, and lots and lots of people playing these games give a f*** about it .

[Dwarden 1125]

one of great signs of strategic resource management is to utilize captured country military...

when Germans occupied Czechoslovakia, they technically used all the troops carriers, light and medium tanks and trucks to capture NL, BE and fullfil the fast overtake of France also due to these additional vehicles

contructing own ones would mean delay the attacks by year(s) which would give enemy time to prepare

same goes for example of Russian equipment captured, like Pak 36® ...

yes for wepons there was bigger problem with ammunition as soviets usually used lil bit bigger caliber than germans, but germans captured plenty of ammo too

(tho in case of the this gun there was upgrade and manufactured own ammo)

from soviet side,

e.g. after Stalingrad, Soviets had so many captured enemy Panzer III tanks that they rebuilt hundreds of them into SU-76i

or what You think happened post WW2, soviets captured huge cache of weapons like Mauser rifles and similar ... they simply spread it across theirs satellites and allies

in war times, it don't matter who developed the weapon first and where the design originate, if it's good enough, it will be used ... or even produced if possible

Edited March 25, 2012 by Dwarden

[paecmaker 23]

one of great signs of strategic resource management is to utilize captured country military...

when Germans occupied Czechoslovakia, they technically used all the troops carriers, light and medium tanks and trucks to capture NL, BE and fullfil the fast overtake of France also due to these additional vehicles

contructing own ones would mean delay the attacks by year(s) which would give enemy time to prepare

same goes for example of Russian equipment captured, like Pak 36® ...

yes for wepons there was bigger problem with ammunition as soviets usually used lil bit bigger caliber than germans, but germans captured plenty of ammo too

(tho in case of the this gun there was upgrade and manufactured own ammo)

from soviet side,

e.g. after Stalingrad, Soviets had so many captured enemy Panzer III tanks that they rebuilt hundreds of them into SU-76i

or what You think happened post WW2, soviets captured huge cache of weapons like Mauser rifles and similar ... they simply spread it across theirs satellites and allies

in war times, it don't matter who developed the weapon first and where the design originate, if it's good enough, it will be used ... or even produced if possible

There is one thing I wonder with the Merkava though. I know why the Iranians use it and its ok for me, but the american forces also use it but dont they have other tanks instead, it feels a bit strange that they change the M1A2/A3? to a tank that is equally old instead of some newer tank like for example the challenger 2?

[Black Cat 10]

I believe the Merkava is getting used (alongside Mi-48, Paria, Oshkos, Fennek, L-159, etc.) by BLUFOR because it is captured from the enemy. As you can expect the NATO forces on Limnos are completely cut off from the rest of the force so it is only logical that they do not have NATO vehicles. Now that raises the question: Will we be able to change the paintsheme of our vehicles?

[papanowel 120]

I know why the Iranians use it and its ok for me, but the american forces also use it but dont they have other tanks instead, it feels a bit strange that they change the M1A2/A3?

It's a NATO forces not only american one ;)

[Smurf 12]

....

So you are saying that A3 will feature a full WW2 campaign of those facts? NICE!

:rolleyes:

__________

Even after launch people will continue to complain about those things.... get over it already godammit! The "simulation" that ARMA brings isn´t about what kind of vehicles or weapons are used, but HOW they are used\work.

I expect them to REALLY make weapons\systems to work as IRL this time.... The first thing that comes to mind for me is the M136/AT4 beign reloadable instead of discartable; silly smoke trails instead of 2 big bangs; no backblast. Makes me go FPDR when looking at the game cover and read th "Ultimate Simulator" thing.