Is Arma 3 authentic?

[smookie 11]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-HwLIfWEags8/TeFIGz0sv3I/AAAAAAAAHio/HG7x2GUGkic/s1600/amarok_remote_weapon_station_dvd_2009_defence_exhibition.jpg

Nah, this one is too serious, no happy face at all..

[Thunderbird 0]

Being one of those unflexible minds completely unable to throw themselves into the future, one of the first things I'd do once ArmA III is released, is to port ArmA II community made Addons to ArmA III, and then replace ArmA III vanilla units with 2012 suitable elements & units.

;]

Regards,

TB

[nodunit 397]

With permissions of course.

[Thunderbird 0]

That would be for my personnal use, of course.

If any changes occur in these regards and the porting is properly done, then permissions will be requested, obviously. ;]

Regards,

[paecmaker 23]

i love the arma series always have, but if theres something i think is not authentic it is that i doubt in the future they will make machine gun turrets look like smiling robotic dogs!

every time i see this vehicle in game i will think of that, sorry if i ruined it for the rest of yas lol

Robodog 2.0

Now with cannon and machinegun.

What have you done, now Im going to see it whenever I see this cannon.

[x3kj 1247]

...

woof woof! good one.

[metalcraze 290]

Being one of those unflexible minds completely unable to throw themselves into the future, one of the first things I'd do once ArmA III is released, is to port ArmA II community made Addons to ArmA III, and then replace ArmA III vanilla units with 2012 suitable elements & units.

;]

Regards,

TB

FFUR 2012 is a go

[NoRailgunner 0]

Actually USMC has approved the deployment extension of K-MAX Cargo UAS, the first unmanned helicopter to deliver cargo and resupply troops in a combat zone. Boeing's Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System II/h or something similar is another thing that could be nice to see + use in A3. Times are changing.... ;)

[liquidpinky 11]

Actually USMC has approved the deployment extension of K-MAX Cargo UAS, the first unmanned helicopter to deliver cargo and resupply troops in a combat zone. Boeing's Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System II/h or something similar is another thing that could be nice to see + use in A3. Times are changing.... ;)

Completely feasible thanks to ToH already having the sling loading and OA the unmanned UAV and in fact the MH6 ULB.

[[evo] dan 79]

Completely feasible thanks to ToH already having the sling loading and OA the unmanned UAV and in fact the MH6 ULB.

But the question is will BIS make them work in multiplayer this time without a community made work around?

[liquidpinky 11]

Dan;2199655']But the question is will BIS make them work in multiplayer this time without a community made work around?

Fingers crossed, got to wonder how the PhysX side of things will fit into the frame as well though.

I spotted the ToH cargo crates a mile off in the demo videos, but they could just be clutter assets now for all we know.

[someguydrawingstuff 1]

Nice Thread, its everytime cool to see how detailed ARMA is :)

[DavidCastle 1]

The simple fact that any Iranian would be using Merkavas or Tavors is so ridiculously stupid that it makes my brain bleed.

I don't think so. The Iranians already have an M16 variant which is taken from a Chinese clone of the m16. It works pretty decently (i wouldn't say as well as the m16/m4/ar15... but what does? heh). The chinese clone everything and the Iranians are good friends with the Chinese, what makes the the Iranians having a Tar in the future so unauthentic? The chinese could have cloned it and the Iranians might have got it from the Chinese. Heck maybe the iranians intercepted an israeli weapon shipment and now they have Tars.... lol there is no rule saying people can only use weapons they design. Heck, many US PMC and Special forces operators us AK variants.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

I don't think so. The Iranians already have an M16 variant which is taken from a Chinese clone of the m16. It works pretty decently (i wouldn't say as well as the m16/m4/ar15... but what does? heh). The chinese clone everything and the Iranians are good friends with the Chinese, what makes the the Iranians having a Tar in the future so unauthentic? The chinese could have cloned it and the Iranians might have got it from the Chinese. Heck maybe the iranians intercepted an israeli weapon shipment and now they have Tars.... lol

Very good point, the Chinese definitely have a hand in this from the lore and geopolitical perspective. :D

---------- Post added at 23:43 ---------- Previous post was at 23:38 ----------

P.S. L-159 looks like a cool jet in terms of multiplayer balance, good specs too - almost Mach 1 speeds http://www.abload.de/img/arma3_screenshot_1202sp5of.jpg Loved the L-39 in Op Arrowhead.

[chortles 263]

I don't think so. The Iranians already have an M16 variant which is taken from a Chinese clone of the m16. It works pretty decently (i wouldn't say as well as the m16/m4/ar15... but what does? heh). The chinese clone everything and the Iranians are good friends with the Chinese, what makes the the Iranians having a Tar in the future so unauthentic? The chinese could have cloned it and the Iranians might have got it from the Chinese. Heck maybe the iranians intercepted an israeli weapon shipment and now they have Tars.... lol there is no rule saying people can only use weapons they design. Heck, many US PMC and Special forces operators us AK variants.

Quickie explanation: That "Chinese clone of the m16" is the Norinco CQ 5.56 (or just "CQ"), basically akin to the M16A1 but with slightly different front sight, stock, pistol grip and a ribbed though still slightly tapering handguard; the M16 "variant" is apparently a licensed copy of that, the DIO Model S-5.56 (the S-5.56 A3 having a M16A2/A4-style barrel apparently?), while apparently Norinco's CQ Type A or "CQ-M4" is a straight-up M4A1 clone.

But yes, even the possibility of the Iranians having their own CTAR-21 lookalike (could be that the Iranian version is TRG-21 while a separate TAR-21 exists out there) is not unheard of... although its use of the same 6.5 mm Grendel magazines is interesting.

[Gilson 10]

Armaverse, doesn't have to make anymore sense than the devs made a design choice.

[chortles 263]

Armaverse, doesn't have to make anymore sense than the devs made a design choice.

The best answer.

[Raptor 10]

I'm looking forward to an authentic realization of the demilitarised island, Lemnos. (Link)

[genpatton043 10]

I don't think so. The Iranians already have an M16 variant which is taken from a Chinese clone of the m16. It works pretty decently (i wouldn't say as well as the m16/m4/ar15... but what does? heh). The chinese clone everything and the Iranians are good friends with the Chinese, what makes the the Iranians having a Tar in the future so unauthentic? The chinese could have cloned it and the Iranians might have got it from the Chinese. Heck maybe the iranians intercepted an israeli weapon shipment and now they have Tars.... lol there is no rule saying people can only use weapons they design. Heck, many US PMC and Special forces operators us AK variants.

They do, however its far from being their primary infantry weapon. The Iranians basically have to reverse engineer 90% of their equipment and attempting to update them with more modern electronics. Where else in the world are you going to find a nation that is still producing F-5 fighters?

I also am not a fan of seeing them using the Merkava, especially since they are well versed in its weaknesses after the '06 S. Lebanon War. When it comes to them having an MBT of their own, I'd personally rather see them do what they've reportedly done with the SA-10/S-300 and that's secretly purchase a couple from a nation such as Serbia, which they reportedly did after Russia canceled their order as a result of the weapons embargo. and reverse engineer it. So why couldn't they do something similar with say, the newest reported Russian tank that's under development, The “Armata†Universal Combat Platform

Last i saw Russia still plans to begin deploying them next year and field close to 2500 by 2020

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/russia/2012/russia-120217-rianovosti01.htm

I would even go so far as BIS using "Creative License" to simulate an "Upgrade" of the tank to the 2035 time frame of the games story.

[tonygrunt 10]

I'm looking forward to an authentic realization of the demilitarised island, Lemnos. (Link)

Authentic realization of Lemnos would be a heavy militarized island as it is now. Read the next wikipedia paragraph too.

Wikipedia, also known as the most trusted authority to explain disputes between countries. I hear there is a problem between Japan and China lately, if only they checked wikipedia they would have solved it by now.

[chortles 263]

*talk about the Armata*

I imagine that when the decision was made to go with the Merkava, it was both vaguely "futuristic-looking" enough for a casual look(er) and had more publicly available statistics for the ARMA 3 devs to model the in-game counterpart from. The earliest link I've seen on the Armata's existence dates to late February 2011 with seemingly no statistical information about the platform either in MBT form or as the basis for other armored vehicle types (the Wiki article claims that it would be intended to be a tracked vehicle platform that would serve as the basis for MBT, heavy IFV, heavy APC, some self-propelled artillery, and support vehicles, seemingly using the same chassis).

I would even go so far as BIS using "Creative License" to simulate an "Upgrade" of the tank to the 2035 time frame of the games story.

Whoever said that the 2006 conflict even happened in the Armaversum timeline for either BLUFOR or OPFOR to learn from?

[genpatton043 10]

the Armata's existence dates to late February 2011 with seemingly no statistical information about the platform either in MBT form

And a lot from what i have read seems to indicate that the design seems to borrow, perhaps heavily, from both the Object 195/T-95 MBT as well as The Black Eagle. Granted, I understand what you're saying in regards to the Merkava, but if that's the case, why not just go with the "Black Eagle?" as they do look similar, turret wise, at least. And since Iran has had a tendency to modify designs of equipment that's 40yrs+ old and attempted upgrades that modernize them to an extent, by today's standards at least, give them "The Black Eagle" itself since we do know what that looked at least looked liked and since it appears to be the first Russian MBT that for once, doesn't use the chassis of the T-72 series, which is a welcome change. I will concede to the possibility that BIS is just using the Merkava as a "placeholder" for a next generation tank like the Armata, especially since the Armata also shares an uncanny appearance to the of the Merkava even to the extent that it may carry infantry in its rear compartment

BLACK EAGLE

ARMATA

T-95(?)

Edited September 13, 2012 by Genpatton043

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Are those crew hatches on the rear-view of the diagram? Hehe.

[genpatton043 10]

Are those crew hatches on the rear-view of the diagram? Hehe.

Exactly, that was my point. I am trying to find another diagram I just saw that had 5 individuals sitting behind each other and since the Armata is said to use a crew less turret system there really is no other explanation.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

I suspect, that by having empty space in an MBT, other components would suffer: either fuel capacity, ammunition storage or even a smaller engine, resulting in not a very optimum performance. Turret itself doesn't look like it could hold the standard count of ammunition.