General Discussion (dev branch)

[M. Glade 524]

Can anyone let me know what happened to the Tanoa Hunters and HEMTT? I swear there were textures for them. 

[SuicideKing 233]

8 hours ago, TheMasterofBlubb said:

@SuicideKing  Would be interesting if the missiles get Anti Radiation sensors for long range and from like 1km it switches to IR/Vis.

To be honest... I'd be a bit annoyed if the only ARM variant we got was a jack of all trades like that. I don't mind if there are some advanced multi-seeker missiles, but I sure as heck want a pure anti-radiation thing to be the base variant.

[bumgie 49]

EDIT: I somehow managed to post this in the wrong place. This was meant to go to here:

 

There is an alpha release out. This thread should be moved to completed mods section, or another thread should be created there.

 

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1282716647

Edited June 18, 2018 by bumgie
Wrong place. Sorry.

[Beagle 684]

8 hours ago, TheMasterofBlubb said:

@Beagle i mean to fight the same target. IR is just more reliable. as it aproaches the Radartarget is checks if it can switch to IR so even if the radar is switched of in the last sec it doesnot save you. I can imagine that such systems exist

I don't know of any missile that uses different sensors on the same missile. The real AGM-88 uses an memory system to just keep it flying to the last known radar target position. Just switching radar off alone is not enough to spoof the missile.

[dragon01 902]

It actually depends. The backup inertial guidance is pretty accurate on its own, but it gets its initial data from the emissions sensor. The thing with that sensor is, it's rather inaccurate at long ranges. Normally, this is not a problem - it's still good enough to fly towards the general area of the target, and as the range to target decreases, homing on radar signal gets more accurate, and in terminal phase it's more than good enough to nail the radar. However, should the radar get switched off, the missile will have to rely on a long-range fix that will, at best, place it somewhere within the SAM site's perimeter. The best thing you can hope for is that the enemy will turn the radar back on too early, allowing the missile to update the fix while much closer to the target and promptly correct itself. If that doesn't happen, the missile will more likely than not go wide.

 

Shutting off the radar is an effective defense even against modern ARMs. That said, with it being a passive seeker, you don't get much in terms of a warning when one is launched (even if you do have a radar good enough to detect missiles at a far enough distance, you can't tell an ARM from a regular AGM). Furthermore, a SAM site going blind for too long is not only rendered useless, but since the launch aircraft also knows its position, it's open to attack by AGMs or even bombs, 'Nam style. Neither side really has it easy.

[Rhyder_Morra 74]

is it normal that tempest crew cannot survive even slam explosion?

 

[Beagle 684]

3 hours ago, Rhyder_Morra said:

is it normal that tempest crew cannot survive even slam explosion?

 

The rear cargo part is not armoured, only the cabin is.

[Rhyder_Morra 74]

2 minutes ago, Beagle said:

The rear cargo part is not armoured, only the cabin is.

i've talked about crew in cabin. They also died

 

 

[lexx 1363]

The Tempest always annoyed me: We have the closed off armored variant as repair / ammo truck, but the soldiers are transported behind a stupid cloth layer. BI should have made some simple interior for the fully armored variant to allow the secure transportation of personnel. Heck, just take the Kamysh or Marid interior, modify it slightly and slap it on the truck if all else fails. Would still be better than what we have right now.

[metalcraze 290]

If it's going to be a last one - I just want 'Old Man' to finally be ArmA - a proper singleplayer experience based on realism with no corners cut in what can happen that would mess up situations in great (and not so) ways - just like OFP/ArmA1/ArmA2 SP side of things was

Always felt like OFP Resistance should've been an open world game... Since you alone gather a team from whatever survivors you find and run around across wide areas scavenging for stuff to fight a superior enemy - it's kinda a pity it was a linear set of missions. Then again it was 2002 and at the time it was one of a highlights of game design. But mix that with the likes of OFP's COIN2 mod and have an infinite replayability

[dragon01 902]

Just saw the news that dev-branch will be switching to weekly updates. While I think it's a very good idea, I hope that in case of a change breaking something very badly (has happened a few times), it'll still be possible for the fix to be released the following day. 

[DnA 5143]

22 hours ago, dragon01 said:

I hope that in case of a change breaking something very badly (has happened a few times), it'll still be possible for the fix to be released the following day.

It's possible these weekly updates will receive at least the very basic of 'smoke tests' to filter out game-breaking bugs (unlike so far, where Dev-Branch updates have mostly been blind fire ). And of course we retain the ability to do ad hoc updates whenever it is needed or desired to test something specific. The main change is that the default frequency will no longer be daily ("logistical issues" was fun for a short while ).

[snoops_213 75]

Tweaked: Autoseeking missiles check target visibility (through terrain) when locking

What does this mean? Will this allow missiles to be fired over terrain by AI? 

[SuicideKing 233]

7 hours ago, snoops_213 said:

Tweaked: Autoseeking missiles check target visibility (through terrain) when locking

What does this mean? Will this allow missiles to be fired over terrain by AI? 

I was hoping this would mean that missiles that don't have LOS won't be able to auto acquire targets, but i don't know either.

[Yoshi_E 179]

Quote

Tweaked: AG missiles now get lost when not pointed at ground when fired 

Was not able to reproduce this in the dev branch yet. Tested with an A-10 Firing slightly above the horizon. So it prob not on it yet.

 

Quote

Tweaked: Autoseeking missiles check target visibility (through terrain) when locking

 

Auto seeking missiles (autoseek = 1) should only be the gun fired missiles of the Rhino atm. Not sure if this is meant for them, or the new mad dog launched ARH missiles.

[winse 22]

Guys, have you ever had a thought tanks in game are underprotected against guided missiles?

 

Here is what we have:

-Tank has 2 rounds of smoke launcher.

-Smoke launcher covers about 180 deg area in front of tank (or tank turret) leaving other 180 deg unprotected, read - defenseless.  Thus if missile comes from unprotected side - then ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

-Tank crew has no Idea (except T-140K) from which direction missile incoming. They can only deploy smokes and prey. If missile comes from another side - then ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

-Missiles have around 50% (plus or minus) chance of ignoring smokes.

-Some AT missiles can be manually guided. Tank crew has NO warning on that. From a crew perspective - tank just explodes. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

-AT Missile soldier has inventory of 3 missiles. If first 2 missiles didn't kill a tank because of smokes - the third will be launched when tank has no smokes left. Thus a single AT soldier is guaranteed to take out a tank. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

-Aircrafts are maneuverable, read - can launch missiles from tank unprotected directions.

-Aircrafts carry a dozen of AT missiles. Each missile has a chance to ignore smokes. With such setup tank can't survive an aircraft attack even in theory. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

I put down all that, because the last days, I've been playing an MP game mode with a lot of tanks, aircrafts and missiles. No any gameplay-changing scripts or mods - plain A3 vanilla. 

And in my notice - tanks are nothing more than a food for planes/heli`s/AT-Soldiers. Regardless of how a cool tanker you are - the 1st incoming enemy aircraft would send you to respawn.

 

I wonder if anyone else had the same thoughts ever? If yes, then what are your thoughts of how all that could be resolved?

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

1 hour ago, winse said:

I wonder if anyone else had the same thoughts ever? If yes, then what are your thoughts of how all that could be resolved?

 

When no one cares to take care of choppers/jets/AT infantry then the tank will be cannon fodder.

 

Just because you're in a tank doesn't mean you're invincible.

 

Don't drive head on into an AO, scout the surroundings first and rely on other players to relay information about possible threats to a tank.

With a bit of cooperation a deployed sniper team and 2 folks with AA launchers should be able to eliminate all threats to the tank.

If it's clear you can move in and make short work of MRAPs, APCs and other tanks/infantry with ease.

 

Nothing wrong there.

 

Cheers

[winse 22]

12 minutes ago, Grumpy Old Man said:

 

When no one cares to take care of choppers/jets/AT infantry then the tank will be cannon fodder.

 

Just because you're in a tank doesn't mean you're invincible.

 

Don't drive head on into an AO, scout the surroundings first and rely on other players to relay information about possible threats to a tank.

With a bit of cooperation a deployed sniper team and 2 folks with AA launchers should be able to eliminate all threats to the tank.

If it's clear you can move in and make short work of MRAPs, APCs and other tanks/infantry with ease.

 

Nothing wrong there.

 

Cheers

Yeah, already heard all of that:) Certainly if I have a couple of players with AA around me, the things get much easier.

But there is also another side of a coin: players are too easy to destroy AI-controlled armor. And AI controlled AA can't do much coz gets destroyed almost instantly.

[winse 22]

Honestly I would be OK if things left as they are, but current smokes efficiency would be increased up to 100%.

-Tanks have only 2 smoke rounds

-Smokes have a limited usage (not a 360 degree + no info of missile direction incoming)

And for me it looks very-very strange and unfair that missiles hit tanks through smokes, taking into account these 2 points.

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

1 minute ago, winse said:

Honestly I would be OK if things left as they are, but current smokes efficiency would be increased up to 100%.

-Tanks has only 2 smoke rounds

-Smokes have a limited usage (not a 360 degree + no info of missile direction incoming)

And for me it looks very-very strange and unfair that missiles hit tanks through smokes, taking into account these 2 points.

The thing with launching those smoke rounds is, you shouldn't stay there after deploying them.

 

Cheers

[winse 22]

@Grumpy Old Man Missile hits you too quick to move to any significant distance. And, if you "don't stay there", you get out of your smokes.

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

1 hour ago, winse said:

@Grumpy Old Man Missile hits you too quick to move to any significant distance. And, if you "don't stay there", you get out of your smokes.

Smokes aren't hard cover. The purpose of the smoke is to make the missiles lose lock, if you're out in the open with no hard cover nearby to retreat towards then you're toast.

No different with a tank than it's as infantry.

 

Cheers

[stanhope 411]

1 hour ago, winse said:

@Grumpy Old Man Missile hits you too quick to move to any significant distance. And, if you "don't stay there", you get out of your smokes.

according to http://armedassault.wikia.com/wiki/:

Quote

The AT missile [of the titan] has a maximum range of 2,000 metres both for when locking on and for manual guidance. It has an initial launch velocity speed of 18 m/s and can reach a top in-flight speed of 180 m/s.

 

The HEAT missile [of the vorona] has a maximum control range of 2,000 metres. It has an initial velocity speed of 150 m/s and can reach a top in-flight speed of 900 m/s.

The following times assume that the projectiles reach top speed instantly, which they in reality do not.  All the following times are thus shorter than what you would encounter in-game.

 

Say you were at 500 meters when getting shot at, the titan would take 2,7 seconds to get to you, the vorona 0,6 seconds.
1000 meters: titan 5,6 seconds, vorona 1,1 seconds
1500 meters: titan 8,3 seconds, vorona 1,6 seconds

2000 meters: titan: 11,1 seconds, vorona: 2,2 seconds

 

Doing some in-game testing it appears to me that the smokescreen needs ~3,5 seconds to deploy (from pressing the button to a fully deployed smokescreen).

So if the guy shooting at you is using a vorona you're screwed.  If he's using a titan and is more than 1000 meters you have 2,1 seconds to press that button to deploy the smoke screen.  At 1500 meters you even have time to drive a pretty good distance before the missile gets close to you.

And in about 1.5 seconds you should be able to roll back behind the cover you are next to or dip back underneath that ridge-line you were peaking over.  

 

Keep in mind, AT missiles are designed to take out tanks, you're not supposed to survive an encounter with them.

[Yoshi_E 179]

All I can tell from personal experience and testing is: Smoke screens work the same way flares on aircraft do.

The Launching progress of them is what makes a missile lose the lock.

The smoke screen itself, does not block or break the lock, only the deployment of it does.

The direction the smoke is deploy at, does not play a role for the missile. If the missile comes from behind and you drop the smoke to the front, it will have the same effect as if the missile would attack from the front.

Smoke screen itself can be useful against directed fire by other armor, or manually guided missiles e.g Verona if they are shot by other players. Do not rely on deployed smoke to break the lock of a missile.

 

Its relatively easy to increase the number of smoke screens a vehicle can use (simply add more) or to increase / decrease the effectiveness of the smoke screen deployment

[winse 22]

1 hour ago, Yoshi_E said:

or to increase / decrease the effectiveness of the smoke screen deployment

Could you elaborate here? I know only a script way ("Fired" or "IncomingMissile") but it is not what I'd like to use.