Is Arma 3 authentic?

[Tonci87 163]

Yes i know but still, you know that Arma 3 will not come till Q3 of 2013 though.

You can have complete futuristic game if you realize that Germany could invent time machine and they could travel through it you see ?

And Bam, you have futuristic WW2 Arma 3 with time machine.

Go away troll

[MAVEN 1]

Is it me or do the ArmA 3 models look better than the real life models?

And, lol at Butterfly Real Life and Bohemia Introllactive:D

[instagoat 133]

Yes i know but still, you know that Arma 3 will not come till Q3 of 2013 though.

You can have complete futuristic game if you realize that Germany could invent time machine and they could travel through it you see ?

And Bam, you have futuristic WW2 Arma 3 with time machine.

C&C Red Alert?

[raptor90 1]

C&C Red Alert?

No, wait i forgot about DayZ too you see ?

Damn, that would be game like ....

[max power 21]

Why are you so sure ? :)

Are you speaker of the BIS dev team or what ?

Its still discussion.

I am not even a speaker for the dev team, but I can tell you that if you have a suggestion, to dump it into the suggestion thread and get on with the topic at hand here. There is a reason we have one suggestion thread, and also this topic. It is because ANY discussion is not good enough in every topic. Either post on topic or not at all.

[instagoat 133]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0c/Namer_in_US.jpg

Oh dear, US Army using Namers. What is the world coming to :I

This is a photo made in Fort Bliss during some sort of Vehicle evaluation thing. With a bit of handwaving, you can get this to be good. It´s not like the Namer is a bad ICV for the region. It´s just a bit heavy.

That said, I am more worried about basic armour penetration simulation in the game, rather than specific vehicles. The code is most important, at bottom, to making the game realistic.

[Tonci87 163]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0c/Namer_in_US.jpg

Oh dear, US Army using Namers. What is the world coming to :I

This is a photo made in Fort Bliss during some sort of Vehicle evaluation thing. With a bit of handwaving, you can get this to be good. It´s not like the Namer is a bad ICV for the region. It´s just a bit heavy.

That said, I am more worried about basic armour penetration simulation in the game, rather than specific vehicles. The code is most important, at bottom, to making the game realistic.

^this

All the vehicels are just eye candy if there isn´t a proper armour penetration system

[MAVEN 1]

Modern day armored vehicles are not really trully armored like older armored vehicles ;)

The reason is simple. It's cost infective to build, say for example, a tank with superb armor when projectiles are so advanced and pack a huge punch for low buck. M2A1 is sleek looking tank, has some neat tech, has special armor plates, it works perfectly against RPG shells in mid east, but it takes one, just one guided missile (air or ground launched) to blow it to shreds, and poof, millions of dollars worth masterpiece blown to ashes over a ~10k projectile, and that's nothing, lives that are lost don't have a price tag.

So it's better to have an armored vehicle that can protect from small arms fire but move very fast and avoid being locked/blown to shreds unlike heavily armored tanks that are just sitting ducks on the battlefield. The eye candy is actually a welcome feature, soon enough there will be shapes/patterns that do the camouflaging even better (there are some technologies already used for past 50 years actually) and improve vehicle speeds.

As a saying goes - Once you see the flash, it's too late :D

[chortles 263]

That said, I am more worried about basic armour penetration simulation in the game, rather than specific vehicles. The code is most important, at bottom, to making the game realistic.

This makes sense to me -- after all, if they're able to implement real-world principles (hence "accurate simulation") then BI can go ahead and use all-fictional vehicles for all I care.

[chabekekie2003 1]

lookis to be the best one of the series

[scrim 1]

As much as everyone loves Multicam and the helmets and what not, I do think they should do something a bit more modern than that. I mean, Multicam is sheduled to be replaced, so I doubt we'll be seeing much of that in 2035. The helmets are specific ones available today, and I don't believe there'd be much reason to use them either in 2035. I mean, even today the lower weight doesn't seem to appeal enough for SF soldiers to give away the added coverage, and there are already new even lighter and more resistant full size helmets being tried out. It seems like in terms of infantry, it's almost only the weapons that don't exist today and have existed for quite a while.

[Detrimented 1]

I read through nearly 80 pages until i could no longer refrain from posting.

There is nothing wrong with a fictional scenario, but as i understand it people here seem to be asking for a more reasonable/logical (fictional) future scenario and its completely understandable.

First and foremost, it isnt THAT unlikely that in a future world Iran will be using Israeli equipment, far from it... Unlike most of the arab world, Iran's majority seeks to be westernized, making a switch of political regime capable of turning it into one of Israel's future allies. However, as Iran is portrayed in BI fictional scenario it seems like the political regime was replaced with a similar one only stupid enough to approach via direct war instead of using proxies. Modern day Iran doesn't war with Israel directly because they stand not the slightest chance considering they are inferior on all ends. Currently Israel and the Arab world is kinda like the David and Goliath scenario whereas Israel is Goliath with its battle-hardened reserve troops and technological supremacy. Iran is roughly 20-30 years behind in Technology with little to no military experience. Assuming a war breaks out in the modern world, Israel's military experience and equipment is so much more advanced over that of most of the western world that Iran does not have the slightest chance of winning such a direct confrontation, no matter if supported by Russia or by China. (Just for kicks and giggles - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ofeq)

Second, even if you go around all of the above reasoning - the rate at which new military technologies are developed by Israel will result in FAR more advanced weaponry than the Tavor or the Merkava by 2035, forcing BI to invent newer models based on older Israeli tech.

And thirdly, i wonder how do so many of you compare the Merkava MK IV with any modern equivalent. Are you judging it by maximum speed/turn rate, armor and firepower? if so then you are thinking in WWII terms instead of modern terms. The Merkava is not prized for such specs, but the technological equipment that is mounted on it, making it without a doubt one of the most sophisticated and indestructible tanks the REAL world had ever seen. Here are but a glimpse of the systems installed on the Merkava MK IV:

1. The Iron Fist/Trophy APS, having no equivalent in the world, are a passive defense system that is capable of giving the Merkava the edge over any modern tank on its own.

2. IP Mobile Network Software (Rafael's BNET), allowing the tank to receive live feedback from any other vehicle, infantry, UAV, fighter jet and naval fleet around or even relatively far away. (http://www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SIP_STORAGE/FILES/6/1246.pdf)

3. Every Station has full control of the tank, allowing the commander assume the driver's role from his own station in case the driver is killed and vice versa. Every station in the tank can be assumed control of via another station.

What makes it even more unlikely that the Merkava MK IV will be used by a foreign military is that the edge of the Merkava over other tanks is the dozens if not hundreds of high-tech systems that are interconnected with the Merkava's. That is why for the Israeli's selling it abroad is out of the question, to sell it you'd have to sell the many systems that are used by the Merkava as well as the Merkava being part of. What if i tell you that there are systems that can be installed on the Merkava, allowing it to launch 15km range drones that transmit direct feedback to it?

Yes, i've seen the inside of the Merkava, seen it on live demonstration and have several friends who operated in one during the recent wars. Unlike the Tavor, there is no logic what-so-ever behind its use by any foreign military, none.

Edited March 7, 2013 by Detrimented

[paecmaker 23]

*text*/QUOTE]

About that opfor uses israeli weapons, well actually lately we havent seen a single opfor unit with israeli weapons or vehicles, probably it was just BIS to troll the community :D.

For example instead of TAR 21 they use the KH 2002 in the alpha, we can probably see the same with later weapons and vehicles.

[Detrimented 1]

Also i quote the wiki page for the Merkava: "On July 14, 2011, The Jerusalem Post reported that the IDF was beginning to develop a successor for the Merkava series of tanks. The development was started in part by the arrival of the Trophy active protection system. With the system's abiliy to intercept threats at a stand-off distance, there was a review of the need for vehicles like the Merkava to have thick, heavy layers of armor. By July 2012, details began to emerge of considerations for developing technologies for the new design. One possibility is the replacement of the traditional main gun with a laser cannon or an electromagnetic pulse cannon. Other improvements could include a hybrid-electric engine and a reduced crew of two. The goals of the new tank are to make it faster, better protected, more interoperable, and more lethal than the current Merkava. The IDF is hoping for it to be operational by 2020"

[slatts 1978]

Like the Merkava and hunter, the Tavor was merely place holders for OPFOR's proper equipment.

[sproyd 2]

bump a good and useful thread

[MasterDon 10]

Thanks! You definitely made me feel better about these experimental additions to the series!

[noAnchor 10]

I love that they did a very good job on making them nearly identical. Definitely makes it more exciting in my opinion.

[purepassion 22]

Thanks a lot MasterDon! That's exactly what I made it for. Good to hear it made you realize :)

@noAnchor, indeed! I was especially impressed to see the amount of detail used for complete areas such as the power plant on Limnos.

[OrLoK 20]

Hello there

IMHO this should be a sticky thread as it soon disappears when not given attention or bumped (which can cause problems).

I often refer folk to this thread (from other forums) as the general opinion of many is that the game has gone uber futuristic and it's nice to be able to show that this is not strictly true. But finding it sometimes can be a chore, so any chance of pinning it somewhere?

Rgds

LoK

[samco 1]

oddly , to me Arma 3 , if you consider it is set up in 2030 , doesn't seem futuristic enought at least for some aspects , i am hoping to see some hybrid helos like the sikorsky x2 or the s-97 raider rather than the comanche and more advanced tech to the infantry in the final game.

[nodunit 397]

You'll never see it, the community would have a shit fit unless it was done by an addon or perhaps an expansion at most.

[chortles 263]

You'll never see it, the community would have a shit fit unless it was done by an addon or perhaps an expansion at most.

Puh-lease, this is the same community where someone can have a fit of Internet rage because devs dared to label an ammo as "caseless". :rolleyes:

I'd look forward to seeing the "more futuristic" designs such as the S-97 Raider!

[Simas 12]

For AH/MH-9 someone made a really nice suggestion as bug #7575. To use NOTAR - this way the heli would at least look like from the near future..

[chortles 263]

I like it and have upvoted it, and like that a dev apparently took a look at it too. :D