OPFOR too Futuristic?

[Guest]

But just because you think they look silly, why does it matter?

If the gear is based off real life, then it is very possible that in a few years this is what soldiers could like.

It's creative, and futuristic, but it is also based off of real world developments.

If you don't like it, that is 100% fine. There will be loads, and loads, and loads of mods after release, and "current" armies will certainly be made available.

This thread is pointless because Arma 3 is way too far into development for BIS to change their design.

[cross888 10]

Yes i understand that alot of this is based of real stuff but alot of the "real" stuff never gets in to service because its completey rubbish.

Look

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4115/4896710873_81f3522a3e.jpg

I can tell you now that i've worn two of those sets of Fighting order and its not the one of the Far left....

Edit:

The middle stuff was prototype its now general issue its 2013 and its only just come in to service for general use. And its service life has been extended to 2035.

Can you see my point yet?

Edited March 7, 2013 by Cross888
I will convert the masses!!

[Guest]

Lol, the on the left just looks pointless mate. :p

It's like a glorified motocross helmet.

But most of the stuff in the Alpha is not as laughable as that. :)

[st!gar 3]

Just to clarify; I think the problem many have with the OPFOR graphical design is not that they look too high-tech, but that they look too silly. There's a very, very, very big difference, there.

[Trakko 1]

Just to clarify; I think the problem many have with the OPFOR graphical design is not that they look too high-tech, but that they look too silly. There's a very, very, very big difference, there.

I think your onto something there mate.

[QuiteFranklyMyMaN 1]

Cooobraaaaa!!!

[PravusErus 10]

If people actually read info about backstory. Nato and Europe is falling apart. Lots of nations have already left Nato so maybe because that it is an underdog here?

And about future stuff.. Conflict starts what happens to tech and equipment? (WWII? Planes tanks weapons?) and also links to youtube what we already have.

"HUD helmet"

Railgun

But Iran? Well yeah.. Maybe China is giving them tech for being ally? Dont know yet. :P

[upredictable 10]

[/url]

[davids 10]

I do agree with most of what has been said here, I think an enemy that is on par or even better is not the problem here... It seems like the problem is the enemy looking very very silly and far to scifi!

[fatalitywolf 1]

Post pictures what you think OPFOR troops should look like!

i agree with this response from a developer. you don't like the current look post some ideas of what they could look like.

i personally think there kinda neat just on a technology standpoint.

[cryrid 10]

After loading them up in the editor and taking a closer look, largely I think they look fine (both in terms of their technology, and aesthetics) aside from the dual-visor thing. But if helmets can be switched out then maybe that isn't even a problem.

[NeMeSiS 11]

I think the opfor helmets may be a bit too much.

[Zacho 0]

I really don't see whats wrong. The helmet has a built in HUD, not big deal. HUD's are out today like that. The outfit they have is a heating/cooling suit, That's why it has the bumps and the fan on the back. Again, there out there now, only going to get smaller over the next 20 years. Nothing to me stands out at OMG Sci-Fi.

[Alistair 10]

They are fine! ;)

[Madus_Maximus 0]

Does nobody here remember the Land Warrior project?

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/land_warrior/images/landwarrior_2.jpg

They've implemented a bunch of that stuff into current issue. Of course it's done differently, but most of the concepts are there. Things like cameras, GPS, electronic maps and VOIP type encrypted comms are fairly standard now.

To those complaining about things like the weight and bulk of things too, just remember that stuff we have now in the consumer space would have been deemed impossible just 5 years ago. Look at modern tablets and how much computing power and battery life they can fit into such a small, thin and light package that also has a stupidly high resolution display. Tech progresses fast. Military tech does too, we just don't see it as quickly because it's mostly test bed stuff than see's several generations of iterations before it's finally used, or has aspects of it used and others scrapped for whatever reason. Just look at the gear a modern NATO infantryman has compared to 10 years ago. Their weapons and webbing and so on may be practically identical, but a lot of the extra crap like radios and other electronics are a fair bit different.

The thing people seem to be largely missing too is that the back story in ArmA 3 says there's been conflict for some time. During times of war, tech progresses much faster. Look at WW2, or Vietnam for example. The stuff used at the beginning of those wars was more or less obsolete by the end of them. Even if they LOOKED the same, a lot of things will have changed under the surface like more efficient, more powerful engines in aircraft, more reliable firing mechanisms with "A1" type weapon modifications and the like. You just have to look at the immense amount of crap we produced during the cold war, and how since it's ended the progression has come to a (comparative) snails pace.

Everything they're using in ArmA 3 is either real, or based very much in reality on current prototypes or other research.

I'm glad to see a more balanced force again anyway. Fighting some farmers turned soldiers equipped with little more than an AK and maybe an RPG and some stolen explosives to make into an IED with Apache's and Abrams and Javelins and the like gets rather old. While in reality we certainly want to have the training, equipment and organisational advantage over our enemies, in a game (or simulation) we want something more challenging and even sided. If we don't like it, we have the map editor and the "Independent" faction and mods to change things to suit what we want. That's the brilliant thing about BIS games. They can be whatever you want them to be if you put in enough effort.

[Ryujin 0]

They do look pretty strange next to the modern looking NATO guys and I do think they are a bit silly looking, that said with the clothing system it takes all of 60 seconds to fix that.

Drop this in the init.sqs and ta-da, a quick fix even without mods:

{

if (side _x == east) then {

_x unassignItem "NVGoggles";

_x removeItem "NVGoggles";

removeuniform _x;

_x adduniform "U_OI_PilotCoveralls";

removeHeadgear _x;

_x addHeadgear "H_HelmetB";

};

} foreach allunits;

[QuiteFranklyMyMaN 1]

I prefer COOOOBRRAAAAAAA trooops.

[mr burns 132]

First time ever being more tempted going Civ vs. Blufor because Opfor straight away sucks :D

[JDevereaux 1]

I don't like their helmets, other than that, np.

This and the hydration unit on their backs or whatever it is.

[Crierd 24]

Yes, G11 and such, and yet most of this futuristic stuff was rejected, usually because it was not as practical as more conventional stuff.

I think when designing Iranian forces we could use typical cold war template: Shocktroopers, well trained, well equiped, but still regulars, doing most frontline combat. And cannon fodder, concripts with gear either already withdrawn from Shocktroopers, or just cheaper, that are supposed to do less important or demanding tasks, filling up defences, securing supply lines, occupying captured territory, or acting as meatshield aganist enemy offensive.

While current ArmA3 Iranian forces will do for first role, second line could use what we see nowadays: regular kevlars, weapons using traditional ammunition like KH2002 or CQ 5.56 (Chinese AR-15 copy), maybe Iranian heavily upgraded T-72s, with FLIR and Relikt ERA.

NATO could use less high-tech variant as well. If war is going on for some time, and NATO isn't exactly winning side it's expected they will increase their numbers, at obvious cost of overall quality of new forces (concripts, national guard-type units and such, reorganized to do frontline stuff).

[edited]

Yes, something like the G11 was rejected, but that doesn't mean that a prototype like that in the future would be rejected. You need to remember, the ideas revolve around the Armaverse. They really aren't that futuristic. It just may seem that way. The helmet has a built in HUD where on the other hand, the Blufor have glasses for that, and they appear to have a neck brace or armor to protect from shrapnel.

The Iranian armor portrayed IG is no different than if you compared uniforms during the Civil War to modern military uniforms and equipment today. Yeah, soldiers wearing load bearing vests and fatigues like Crye provides looks super futuristic in comparison to the simple cotton uniforms and belts with ammo pouches during the Civil War, but just because it appears futuristic, doesn't mean it is. The reality in this analogy is that the two things are very similar, with the only main difference being a change in more modern, flame retardant and moisture wicking materials.

[defk0n_NL 2]

Post pictures what you think OPFOR troops should look like!

I voted they look way to futuristic, not even the technology but more the uniforms. same goes for bluefor. why cant we expand on the OA timeline only with way better gameplay.

Besides from any political discussion of which i condemn putting iran into a videogame like that.

if they were to attack, at all, they wouldn't do it in 20years from now seeing the embargo's and all.

turkey would be more likely to attack greece then iran imho.

big beards and baggy uniforms :D

with this as nvg,

Normal NATO troops have beige boots in all terrains except woodland. But most eastern countries have black boots as standard loadout. Pretty easy to tell apart.

Edited March 13, 2013 by defk0n_NL

[Chocolate 1]

I voted they need to be toned down, but only because of that thing they are wearing on their back that looks like some sort of personal AC unit.

http://blog-imgs-46.fc2.com/o/k/l/okla516/arma_3_steam_aug16_2_4.jpg

[SmallBlackSheep 0]

I like them. Finally you can play OPFOR and still look cool (by western standards).

[krycek 349]

Voted "No,they look fine" because it's a nice change to face someone who has high tech gear just like you.May not be realistic,but it sure is something different than shooting/bombing the Ak-toting Abu and his goats in his crappy technical.

[FanBF2 13]

I voted "Yes they look way to SCIFI." but it's just for their helmets, they are ugly to me.

But if in the final version there are more normal helmets for OPFOR, that doesn't matter for me. :D