General Discussion (dev branch)

[scavenjer 112]

32 minutes ago, oukej said:

Some weapons were too accurate even when compared to their real counterparts (especially gatling types, HMGs, GMGs) and it was possible to use them as way too accurate "sniper" weapons. Having similar long range single-shot kill certainty as with the tank cannons or APC autocannons. But even those were simply "laser precise" without any dispersion at all. It should be now scaled with a better understanding of the purpose of each weapon.

The Marshalls 40mm should still be very precise. This is few shots APFSDS at a 2m diameter target @1000m now (after the change):

# By test-firing 500 APFSDS shots @ 1000m later I've had ~75% < 0.35m, ~95% < 0.5m radius - which might be still more precise than what these weapons realistically are.
## You can also check one article about gun test here https://quillorcapture.com/tag/90mm/ with a target image (but without actual data). (thx @Damian90 for the reference link)

Anyway, as always :), this is very much open to the feedback and changes are possible :)

 

 

The difference should already be there in case of dual feed cannons (different muzzle) - e.g. the mentioned Marshall, Kamysh or also the Kajman.

Ah, good to know! Thanks for the quick response, I have read that the M61 Vulcan had 8 mils of accuracy which does seem consistent with what you show, 40MM did have 0.5 mils which seems accurate too, (I thought it was more from in game experience).

 

I'll see if I can find some 30mm charts that correspond to the cannon on the kajman.

 

EDIT: https://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.be/2016/05/bmp-2.html

I know this might not be the best source but I've seen similar statements on the accuracy of the 2A42.

(2A42 is probably the closest cannon I can find to the kajman as it is fitted on many other Russian attack helicopters)

I understand that firing from a moving platform such as a helicopter has an accuracy penalty but with modern FCSs this shouldn't be too severe.

[SuicideKing 233]

10 hours ago, reyhard said:

Take a look how it looks from outside ;)

So I did! And I understand now why it's like this. But... it looks like someone's stuck cardboard over the viewport, instead of the camera and antenna being a short distance away. Looks very 2D, not at all obvious what it is.

[Strike_NOR 898]

12 hours ago, oukej said:

 

Probably about time you upgrade the virtual shooting range with some metal supports to hold the target.

 

Nerves of steel you say? How about titanium...

 

PS I thought you said you introduced AI suppression a while back... ;)

 

 

 

On a more serious note though, it's nice to see how you are testing out various dispersion settings. Based on your post I would say you are definitely on the correct path for realism :)

[xxgetbuck123 945]

Having weapon dispersion is always good, arguably better than laser accuracy (unless of course your gun is soley for AT purposes). Better spread means better suppression and area of effect, nothing worse than trying to squirt down an enemy section with the coax and having every round land in like a 0.5cm grouping. 

[maihym 12]

Has anyone done any playing around with the new license plate commands? If so, how do they work and when will those commands be put into the game?

[reyhard 2082]

22 minutes ago, maihym said:

Has anyone done any playing around with the new license plate commands? If so, how do they work and when will those commands be put into the game?

 

[scavenjer 112]

1 hour ago, xxgetbuck123 said:

Having weapon dispersion is always good, arguably better than laser accuracy (unless of course your gun is soley for AT purposes). Better spread means better suppression and area of effect, nothing worse than trying to squirt down an enemy section with the coax and having every round land in like a 0.5cm grouping. 

This is a myth, you always want the highest possible accuracy out of a weapon system, if you want area suppression you can simply adjust your fire accordingly.

 

Look up the bren gun myth on YouTube and find a video done by Forgotten Weapons or InrangeTV, very informative.

 

Regardless I see that most cannons have used I been changed correctly, the only one I think is a bit over the top is the Kajman 30MM.

It seems that it has roughly 5 mils of accuracy while that source I posted claims 2-4mils was standard.

IMO combined with the (relatively) low RoF the accuracy is a bit lacklustre and feels "forced".

 

That's just my opinion and people I've talked to seem to agree.

But if this is the way devs want it, so be it.

I thoroughly appreciate that they even take a look at the cannons this late in the game's development time.

[scavenjer 112]

On a slightly different note, I've been trying out the addWeaponTurret commands in the editor to change the loadouts of certain vehicles with the intention to propose changes to the KoTH gamemode.

 

For example: me and my friends have always wondered why the Hellcat is armed with DARs instead of DAGRs, currently even if you equip it with DAGRs the pilot has control over them while the copilot has the FLIR camera.

Logically it would make more sense for the copilot to have control over the DAGRs so he can guide them with the FLIR camera.

 

Anyway, the question I have is wether or not you can at all change weapon characteristics in the editor without the need for mods.

(Changing ROF, FCS, maxzero range, bullet velocity, etc)

I know this is possible via mods but I also think this has been done to an extent in the KoTH gamemode(no mods).

[R3vo 2652]

1 hour ago, maihym said:

Has anyone done any playing around with the new license plate commands? If so, how do they work and when will those commands be put into the game?

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/setPlateNumber

 

I added them to the Wiki yesterday.

[SuicideKing 233]

17 hours ago, oukej said:

and it was possible to use them as way too accurate "sniper" weapons

TBH you'll need to tweak how accurate the AI is with these weapons as well, since they're still really good with them despite the dispersion. Basically, they need to use longer bursts and intentionally miss the first time, so that players get enough of a warning and can take cover. At present, it's basically 1 burst = 1 dead player. Maybe if their default behavior is to suppress rather than kill, it could help?

 

Even in general, the accuracy/sniper thing is not just a consequence of little dispersion, but also one of having almost everything with a scope/camera/CROWs turret. With players, ironsights are inherently going to be less accurate, and iirc the AI benefits from stabilization and zoom too.

 

I made some related comments pertaining to vehicles in the AI Discussion thread a month ago:

 

[lex__1 422]

Tactical ping is still broken.

 

[Vasily.B 529]

On 9.01.2018 at 2:07 AM, xxgetbuck123 said:

 

If its annoying in game.. just imagine dirt on your optics IRL. 

 

I like the idea, just needs to be tweaked. 

IRL you got wipers that can clear vision ports. That can be nice solution for texture transition
 

Spoiler

 

 

 

[SuicideKing 233]

Markers disappear in End Game spectator free camera mode https://feedback.bistudio.com/T127526

[oukej 2910]

6 hours ago, scavenjer said:

Regardless I see that most cannons have used I been changed correctly, the only one I think is a bit over the top is the Kajman 30MM.

It seems that it has roughly 5 mils of accuracy while that source I posted claims 2-4mils was standard.

IMO combined with the (relatively) low RoF the accuracy is a bit lacklustre and feels "forced".

Kajman's 30 mm is a bit of a special case. As a gatling-style cannon it should have a lower precision than revolver cannons. On the other hand - as you mentioned - it's fire rate is pretty low. When compared to other gatling-style cannons it has the lowest fire rate but also the lowest dispersion (with APDS round). Few numbers for Kajman as well:

• 1000 30 mm HE shots @ 1000 m
  ~55% @ < 2.5 m radius
  ~96% @ < 5 m
  median 2.3 m
• 1000 30 mm APDS shots @ 1000 m
  ~63% @ < 1.9 m radius
  ~96% @ < 3.9 m
  median 1.65 m

[scavenjer 112]

23 minutes ago, oukej said:

Kajman's 30 mm is a bit of a special case. As a gatling-style cannon it should have a lower precision than revolver cannons. On the other hand - as you mentioned - it's fire rate is pretty low. When compared to other gatling-style cannons it has the lowest fire rate but also the lowest dispersion (with APDS round). Few numbers for Kajman as well:

• 1000 30 mm HE shots @ 1000 m
  ~55% @ < 2.5 m radius
  ~96% @ < 5 m
  median 2.3 m
• 1000 30 mm APDS shots @ 1000 m
  ~63% @ < 1.9 m radius
  ~96% @ < 3.9 m
  median 1.65 m

Ah, that's actually quite good! 

I must be noticing the"flyers" more then.

 

Thanks for once again taking the time :).

I'd also love to know how you guys set up that testing array!

(Always did testing on vehicles etc and crude measuring)

[x3kj 1247]

On 9.1.2018 at 11:27 PM, scavenjer said:

I understand that firing from a moving platform such as a helicopter has an accuracy penalty but with modern FCSs this shouldn't be too severe.

The biggest accuracy loss on helicopter turrets propably comes from the gun fixture - they can't generally be build as stiff and heavy as on a tank - so it wobbles more due to the fixture and hull flexing each shot. Not something you can compensate with FCS.

[Beagle 684]

17 hours ago, scavenjer said:

This is a myth, you always want the highest possible accuracy out of a weapon system, if you want area suppression you can simply adjust your fire accordingly.

 

Look up the bren gun myth on YouTube and find a video done by Forgotten Weapons or InrangeTV, very informative.

 

Regardless I see that most cannons have used I been changed correctly, the only one I think is a bit over the top is the Kajman 30MM.

It seems that it has roughly 5 mils of accuracy while that source I posted claims 2-4mils was standard.

IMO combined with the (relatively) low RoF the accuracy is a bit lacklustre and feels "forced".

 

That's just my opinion and people I've talked to seem to agree.

But if this is the way devs want it, so be it.

I thoroughly appreciate that they even take a look at the cannons this late in the game's development time.

On the other hand, I noticed that the fictional Mi-48 is now closer to the Ka-50 in DCS regarding the effective range and use and precision of the cannon. Even in DCS when in a auto hover and lased, that 30mm was never good to hit small vehicle targets beyond 1000m....targeting and actually hitting  Infantry (MANPADS)  is pure luck in DCS.

 

DCS is rated as very close to the real deal of one particular Ka-50 pre-production version and was developed with the advice of real Kamov-Pilots.

 

Regarding FCS in general, sich system do not provide laser precision just because they use a laser range finder. The particular precision of unrifled cannons is pretty bad and gets worse over Range but they simply allow for higher muzzle velocity and higher barrel lifetime. That's, by the way, how the Challenger II holds its range to precision record, by giving up penetration power and barrel life time. It still uses a rifled 120mm Cannon.

[oukej 2910]

12 hours ago, scavenjer said:

I'd also love to know how you guys set up that testing array!

Probably the easiest way is to catch the projectile object via fired eventHandler and do some trigonometry. For better visualization we intend to add shots diagnostic (what you see here) to the diagnostics exe.

[scavenjer 112]

42 minutes ago, oukej said:

Probably the easiest way is to catch the projectile object via fired eventHandler and do some trigonometry. For better visualization we intend to add shots diagnostic (what you see here) to the diagnostics exe.

Oh, cool :).

Thanks, I'll have a mess around!

4 hours ago, Beagle said:

On the other hand, I noticed that the fictional Mi-48 is now closer to the Ka-50 in DCS regarding the effective range and use and precision of the cannon. Even in DCS when in a auto hover and lased, that 30mm was never good to hit small vehicle targets beyond 1000m....targeting and actually hitting  Infantry (MANPADS)  is pure luck in DCS.

 

DCS is rated as very close to the real deal of one particular Ka-50 pre-production version and was developed with the advice of real Kamov-Pilots.

 

Regarding FCS in general, sich system do not provide laser precision just because they use a laser range finder. The particular precision of unrifled cannons is pretty bad and gets worse over Range but they simply allow for higher muzzle velocity and higher barrel lifetime. That's, by the way, how the Challenger II holds its range to precision record, by giving up penetration power and barrel life time. It still uses a rifled 120mm Cannon.

Yeah, ka-50 in DCS isn't the most accurate though I think that's largely to deal with the immense vibrations that seem to plague it. (Compared to the Huey)

 

The reason why the Challenger 2 still has it's rifled cannon has nothing to do with accuracy of its shells though.

The British put a premium on the use of HESH which needs to be fired at a certain velocity and can't be fin stabilised, giving it rotation actually helps the effectiveness of the round.

 

When comparing all the 120MM cannons the accuracy difference is negligible, FCS is more important as other factors like temps, pressure and potential barrel warp have a bigger impact than wether a barrel is rifled or not.

APFSDS doesn't care about rifling anyway in terms of accuracy, it might even be adversely affected if the sabot separation doesn't occur smoothly.

[SuicideKing 233]

Quote

Added: New "missileManualControlCone" parameter for manually guided missiles

This made me think, could it be made possible to force AI to use manual control via script commands? Although I suppose this would mean a command to disable manual control in general, and iirc I was told BI isn't going to do that...

[Strike_NOR 898]

Sounds like we are getting beamriders in Arma, or guided shells. :D i hope i'm right!

 

Way better than cursor trackers!

[scavenjer 112]

@oukej

If this isn't the right place, should I put this on the feedback site or on the forums?

 

I'm not sure if this is intended but there's some adverse affects of the accuracy corrections that exacerbate an "issue" that the people I've talked to in the KoTH community seem to agree on, was already a bit of an issue.

Namely the "tanky" nature of jets, they seem to take more damage without being affected than should really be the case.

 

Part of this is ofcourse due to server desync or ping making the jets stutter about and have jerky movements, but there's also some issues with jets seemingly "bouncing" or ricocheting the incoming shells or simply seeming to take a lot of hits without being too much affected.

 

I'm not sure if I should put this here as this is a balancing issue (make a seperate thread), or if I should put this on the feedback site (AFAIK not a bug).

Seeing how shells(20mm vulcan or 35mm AA) ricochet or bounce off quite often off the jets I think there could be an issue with the jets having too much armour.

 

M61 vulcan and 35MM KDA oerlikons have mostly HEI/HEF ammo and therefore should explode on impact (most of the time).

 

Here's a video (DCS gamepley) that demonstrates the behaviour of the M61 vulcan cannon.

Skip to 2:43 and 5:07 (0.25x speed)

 

I realise that Arma 3 isn't supposed to be a realistic jet simulator like DCS and that you have creative freedom to balance the game as you see fit.

However, I (and many others) feel like the cannons (20mm vulcan and 35mm KDA) are not as effective/efficient as they should be.

 

In light of the recent accuracy changes (I think they're good) the cannons will be less effective than before.

Previously the cannons weren't that effective anyway and most people prefered to use missiles even at very close ranges (sub 1KM).

 

Personally I feel that the jets take too much damage to take out (component damage is rare with cannons but common with missiles), could someone tell me if this is intended?

 

If this is not the right place I'd be happy to make a separate thread about this topic as I feel it needs to be adressed.

 

Here's some videos gathered by community members of KoTH HT and myself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1HyJ8PHJt0&t=3840s  (1Hr and 4 minute mark)

 

Korn-Today at 10:10 PM

I'm not sure if this is the kind of videos you're looking for but you can look at it and then decide if it fits or not. First clip simply hitting a buzzard a couple of times and he just keeps flying as if nothing happened. Second clip showing a buzzard hitting himself with a bomb first, then eating a AA missile and a couple of hits from me later he finally died. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBhHCjEsVs4  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_2sxHzQLdw

 

https://streamable.com/zqysu 

https://streamable.com/2pcav

 

 

[SuicideKing 233]

In my experience planes may not explode straight away, but control gets pretty severely affected - at least while taking AAA/SAM hits. Centurion's missiles seem to be 1-hit KOs anyway, at least with the Neophron.

So maybe the fighters' autocannon damage needs a buff, as opposed to jets being tanky. the A-164 (i.e. A10) should be able to absorb more hits since it is more heavily armoured than the other jets, iirc.

[scavenjer 112]

6 minutes ago, SuicideKing said:

In my experience planes may not explode straight away, but control gets pretty severely affected - at least while taking AAA/SAM hits. Centurion's missiles seem to be 1-hit KOs anyway, at least with the Neophron.

So maybe the fighters' autocannon damage needs a buff, as opposed to jets being tanky. the A-164 (i.e. A10) should be able to absorb more hits since it is more heavily armoured than the other jets, iirc.

Sure, that's what I'm saying, the disparity between cannon and missile leads to very little cannon usage, and for jets with little ammo (gryphon 150) it means you quite often can't get a kill even though you have put plenty of shots on target.

A10 was only tanky in the redundancy and the titanium "bathtub", shots to the engines and wings should still have major effects.

[x3kj 1247]

46 minutes ago, scavenjer said:

the disparity between cannon and missile

There are no proximity rounds -> cannon have to directly hit the plane -> much lower hit ratio. In reality, with proximity fuses and AA rounds even near misses would damage the plane.

There can be a discrepancy between visual model and the actual hit geometry and hitpoints too, they may lag behind the visual model, reducing hit chances.

Special shaped charges (HEAT for anti tank and continuous rod ammo for AA usage) are not implemented. Indirect damage (from high strength explosions) is terribly overpowered.

Missiles have larger area of hit, and high hit damage compared to cannon -> damages the entire planes systems in many cases, not just a single one. A Stinger IRL might hit an engine and the engine is toast, but the rest of the plane could be mostly fine. In Arma almost the entire plane gets damaged, but for balance it does not go down from this single hit.