General Discussion (dev branch)

[doln 10]

They just had a civil war, they're in a hotly contested region of the world (in the armaverse) and have quite clearly been getting buddy-buddy with the CSAT. Who are at war with NATO in pacific (or are about to be). Military build-up makes sense. Perhaps the CSAT paid for the MBT's in behind-closed-doors talks/deals.

Regarding "omg identical factions": consider it just expanded possibilities. If you don't want the AAF to have an MBT, don't give them one in a mission. Write it out. Same with the other factions, with the other vehicles. Arma is a sandbox, they're just giving us the tools to play with, its up to us to decide what we want to do with them. Like the NAPA from Arma 2, what if I wanted to give them a Mi-24 in spraypainted NAPA markings? Say they stole them or something? I didn't have that opportunity without using mods, which I personally try to avoid when making missions.

Also, a leopard 2 (the kuma) would be, in 2035, the equivalent of a monkey model t-72 nowadays.

As well as the rest of the AAF's stuff would be nearing the 50 years old mark. It's not high tech by any measure (like the rest of arma 3. A thoroughly missed opportunity, in my opinion, but thats another discussion altogether)

The Merlin (mohawk) first flew in the 80's. The gorgon (pandur) would be nearing 30 years old (so, a bog standard bmp-2), the warrior is from the 60's.

Ya'll gotta calm down.

Edited November 29, 2013 by Doln

[semiconductor 309]

It's nice to see new vehicles and weapons being added but why did you have to give the AAF a tank and an attack helicopter? I thought the whole point of the AAF was that they were a rather small force like the Armed Forces of Malta. Now we have almost 3 identical factions... only thing missing are the jets for both BLUFOR and OPFOR...

For sake of custom mission making I think. Kuma might never appear in campaign, but it can be very useful for community mission makers that don't want to follow campaign's plot and need AAF to have serious firepower.

[Primarch 10]

You're right that pretty much nothing has changed in the SIZE of shells. But the behaviour has changed significant, allowing for more penetration without increasing size, different countries produce different types of shells, changing properties.

Also, you're talking like modern tanks are still using solid metals. Again, the same as above. Changed Behaviour and technology has allowed for much better protection, differing from tank to tank.

nonononononono, please no

Instead make them all equal in every single way like in ArmA 3?

Oh yeah, that's so authentic =D

[semiconductor 309]

Arma is a sandbox, they're just giving us the tools to play with, its up to us to decide what we want to do with them

Agreed, that's exactly what I wanted to say. :)

[blackjacktom 10]

Regarding "omg identical factions": consider it just expanded possibilities. If you don't want the AAF to have an MBT, don't give them one in a mission. Write it out. Same with the other factions, with the other vehicles. Arma is a sandbox, they're just giving us the tools to play with, its up to us to decide what we want to do with them

True, I just wish they would give us some more low tech stuff.

[runekn 3]

Instead make them all equal in every single way like in ArmA 3?

Oh yeah, that's so authentic =D

When have I ever said that :/

Just don't put their differenses on only extra equipment.

Never said that I like the current settings :)

[maturin 12]

I mean the only way that I could compete with my friend at a duel with a T-34-85 against a TUSK is to shoot his barrel dead, then just go behind him and slug away some ten shells into the engine before he was disabled.

I am sure that the abrams does not have over 100mm thick metal radiators over the engines.

It's much better when you can actually deal damage if you see them first.

That's tactics, that's realism.

I think that the only differences should be that the higher tier tanks should move faster and have better optics/ shell velocity/ better sensory systems.

Especially sensory systems and other electronics should be the main focus on the future tanks, since no realistic amount of armor is going to save you from current 120mm shells.

It's all about who sees first.

Why the hell are you complaining about realism in a T-34 vs TUSK duel?

You might as well go make your recommendations for seagull vs F-35 combat scenarios.

[Primarch 10]

Why the hell are you complaining about realism in a T-34 vs TUSK duel?

You might as well go make your recommendations for seagull vs F-35 combat scenarios.

In A2 that's how they handled balancing.

If you had a lower tier vehicle, you couldn't compete with higher tier vehicles, just because it was a newer vehicle. No matter how much better tactics you had.

You realize that if the F-35 gets hit by a MiG-15, it goes down all the same as if it was hit by a newer plane?

[doln 10]

That's how real warfare works, too.

The likelihood of an F-35 getting shot down by a MiG-15 is spectacularly low. Like, 0.00000000000000001%

[runekn 3]

In A2 that's how they handled balancing.

If you had a lower tier vehicle, you couldn't compete with higher tier vehicles, just because it was a newer vehicle. No matter how much better tactics you had.

You realize that if the F-35 gets hit by a MiG-15, it goes down all the same as if it was hit by a newer plane?

Yeah, but a F-35 isn't covered by a super hightech - military secret - armor composition ;)

[Primarch 10]

The likelihood of an F-35 getting shot down by a MiG-15 is spectacularly low. Like, 0.00000000000000001%

Nice, that's exactly what I mean. The F-35 wins because of it's superior in maneuverability, sensors and stealth. It doesn't win just because it's newer like many here like to think.

The better sensory systems would make the higher tier equipment much easier to use efficiently and give you an edge they should.

Don't just make all the tanks carbon copies with similar types of usage with one tank having better overall stats. We're working with mostly stuff that was never finished.

[maturin 12]

In A2 that's how they handled balancing.

If you had a lower tier vehicle, you couldn't compete with higher tier vehicles, just because it was a newer vehicle. No matter how much better tactics you had.

You realize that if the F-35 gets hit by a MiG-15, it goes down all the same as if it was hit by a newer plane?

In ArmA 2 every vehicle could kill every other vehicles.

Tanks were easily disabled by grenade launchers and autocannons, and all AA missiles were roughly equal, making the Su-25 a credible threat to an unwary F-35.

Anyways, back to real life, if an Abrams gets hit by a T-34 almost anywhere, nothing happens. The entire side of the tank is thicker than 90mm RHA (more or less the performance of the T-34's gun), except for a tiny strip near the bottom of the hull, which is also protected by wheels which would probably throw off the shot.

The analogy here is 19th century duelling pistols and kevlar vests.

[metalcraze 290]

Please enlighten us with details of how night vision mode works in MBT gunner primary sights across the world since last two decades. Also, what difference is between real world counterparts of tanks present in the game, and how would you implement these differences ingame.

I personally think the 120mm cannon in config of T-100 is going to be replaced with different cannon.

The point is that all 3 tanks share way too many things in common (and even armor on both T-100 and Merkava seems to be withstanding about the same amount of abuse).

No matter the size of the ammo compartment - the amount of ammunition is always the same for all types.

If T-100, being a russian tank and all (based on T-99 as far as I can tell), will move to its real 125mm turret with the correct ammunition then no problem.

Merkava on the other hand should get its loader too for a realistic 4 men crew. Think sitting inside a tank doing nothing will be boring for a loader? It's 2035 - give loader his own thermal sight and a remote turret. It's only logical that in the future tanks will become stronger and more survivable. In Merkava the loader is also a signaler/radio operator so perhaps some kind of arty computer/support comms will do a great job of giving him more (and real life to boot) functions.

Edited November 29, 2013 by metalcraze

[Bouben 3]

Holding action key would show the menu like you said, but release it would make a selection (no need to click please!)

That would be problematic. How would you cancel the menu then? Release to commit is not a really safe method for me.

[nicolasroger 11]

You could have a "Cancel" choice in the menu (all the way down for exemple)

or even right click

But yea maybe no click at all isn't that necessary. But the rose idea is really intreresting

[Smurf 12]

Yeah, hold key + mouse click (having, at least, 3 buttons you can fill a lot of things there) for selection, release the key = menu closes.

[[evo] dan 79]

^this

But also,

Give the Merkava a Mortar, or the option to change out the seats for more ammo as per real life (most Merkava's take the extra ammo, command tanks take extra radio gear in that space and only rarely is the compartment used for infantry (mainly commandos or rescuing other crews when necessary)

[smokedog3para 365]

Any info on towable vehicles and shock waves yet, I thought it would be documented by now as the games been out for a while now but not so many features that was stated in confirmed features thread are in game or it doesn't seem to be there for me ?

also on the tools side can we get a helicopter of some sort and boat and plane for the sample mlods so we can get some mods out or even wiki pages updated as I can only see the car tutorial on the wiki.

[bakerman 247]

If T-100, being a russian tank and all (based on T-99 as far as I can tell), will move to its real 125mm turret with the correct ammunition then no problem.

The fictional T-100 is based on the cancelled T-80UM2 / Black Eagle / Object 640. Nobody really knows what the T-99 / Armata platform will look like nor its final specifications, we'll have to wait for 2015.

Picture of a Black Eagle model

I think a possible solution would be for Bohemia to provide multiple versions of vehicles. The primary version could be the balanced basic version, while the other versions would mirror their real world counterparts. I've messed around with the tank configs in my mod and added a 125mm cannon for the T-100 with new ammo and I've also added a new version of the M2A1, however mods are just extras and it would be super if Bohemia would include this in the game.

[NeuroFunker 11]

well, i already saw armata conecpt arts, which look pretty cool, even some schemes like crew position in a special capsule, autonomus turret etc.

[Wiki 1558]

About the dev branch: will it have episode 2 earlier? Like they did for episode 1?

[Smurf 12]

Why not? It worked great for Ep. 1.

[NeuroFunker 11]

I don't think, there are reasons not to do this again. Not to say, if episode1, came out without devbranch testing first, it would be a catastrophe, nearly everything was fine.

[jgbtl292 0]

It's nice to see new vehicles and weapons being added but why did you have to give the AAF a tank and an attack helicopter? I thought the whole point of the AAF was that they were a rather small force like the Armed Forces of Malta. Now we have almost 3 identical factions... only thing missing are the jets for both BLUFOR and OPFOR...

what the problem - later bis can add a rebbelfraktion to independent side to . its all no problem ^^ what you make with your missions

[2nd ranger 282]

Also, it's the numbers involved. NATO and CSAT will probably have entire companies of tanks and multiple choppers, whereas AAF might only have a couple of each.