General Discussion (dev branch)

[Rhyder_Morra 74]

BI, just a little request

Can we have a possibility to disable\enable tower stabilization? While im not in combat on tanks, id like to enjoy this pretty interiors ^^

 

for example double ctrl or double c

[zukov 483]

IMHO the turret rotation in MGS Rhino is too fast
there isn't the interior recoil in T100

please add the same jungle camo to T100 Varsuk  and a rpg42 in green!

[Hvymtal 1251]

1 hour ago, Alwarren said:

I agree. After all, the Alpha came out five years ago, and we're still getting updates on a regular basis. I want to see what other company does that.

 

You see, I wish there were more people that wouldn't be extremists in either direction. There's always some guy that says "everything is shit" and one guy that says "everything is gold". I wish people would have a realistic outlook on things, so that I could for example say "X needs improvement" and not being called a hater or advised to take up gardening (I don't even have a fracking garden). I wish that an open, honest discussion was possible without either black or white barging in and destroying everything. 

I'll readily admit that BIS is not perfect and has done some weird things, nor have they given us everything we could ever possibly want ever. Arma is by no means a perfect game, and like Luetin said in his Arma 4 wishlist there are some serious backend improvements that could be made to make it a lot less difficult to play online, as well as having more intelligent and reactive AI. It's okay to be frustrated with Arma's problems, of which there are many

But when people start being incredibly rude and self-centered and whiny about it instead of expressing displeasure like a sane person, it really gets on my nerves. Not that anyone could tell

 

I will white knight for BIS to the end of the Earth if it means I get to piss off or shut up haters. Doesn't mean I think their game is perfect. Jesus downhill in a shopping cart, no...

 

[x3kj 1247]

1) Nyx Driver turned out pokes out very very high. Compared to normal variants, the drivers only poke out with their head. And the hatch could open further so it rests on the hull instead of "floating" mid air.

2) T-140 cannon can clip the rear

[Alwarren 2765]

2 hours ago, Rhyder_Morra said:

While im not in combat on tanks, id like to enjoy this pretty interiors ^^

 

 

I recommend getting a head tracker, like the Delan Clip which is still reasonably priced. Alternatively, press ALT :)

 

1 hour ago, Hvymtal said:

I will white knight for BIS to the end of the Earth if it means I get to piss off or shut up haters. Doesn't mean I think their game is perfect. Jesus downhill in a shopping cart, no...

 

The issue I have with white knights is that they distract from the issues. This way, the discussion turns from the "How" to the "If". They flat-out deny there is a problem, that it is the guy that is complaining's fault, and that "Arma isn't the game for you" (I heard that one even though I am nearing 6300 hours). Putting people in place that say thinks like "this game is a piece of junk" is certainly in order. Getting on people's arse because they said "I don't like the way X is implemented and I think Y would be better" is just as bad as the piece-of-junk crowd.

[darkChozo 133]

It looks like the addition of jeep technicals have broken the regular jeeps. Ticket here.

[x3kj 1247]

Rate of fire on the 20mm Wiesel could be increased (real ROF somewhere 900-1000rpm)

Example:

 

[dragon01 902]

1 hour ago, Alwarren said:

The issue I have with white knights is that they distract from the issues. This way, the discussion turns from the "How" to the "If". They flat-out deny there is a problem, that it is the guy that is complaining's fault, and that "Arma isn't the game for you" (I heard that one even though I am nearing 6300 hours). Putting people in place that say thinks like "this game is a piece of junk" is certainly in order. Getting on people's arse because they said "I don't like the way X is implemented and I think Y would be better" is just as bad as the piece-of-junk crowd.

Made especially silly when they post here, which is the exact place BI set up so they could get user feedback... 

[Sgt. Dennenboom 98]

Little error: the Nyx driver cam info panel shows only a black screen (camera is inside the vehicle geometry).

[SuicideKing 233]

SPG-9 on the technical and 4WD is completely silent (and i mean literally silent). Details in the audio tweaking thread.

 

[Ben@Arms 4]

Splendid job so far!

 

One thing though ;)

The Nyx (Autocannon / MK) could use a bit more ammunition. The real counterpart already carries more rounds with it. Other than that, you rock!

[Ex3B 265]

I've got mixed but generally positive feelings.

I can understand why they wanted to add a T-14 to a 2035 arma setting. I can understand why the CSAT faction got it... but it does seem to make the Varsuk entirely redundant. There were other things that could have been added that would fill currently vacant roles

 

Indeed, this is why I'm not annoyed (like some people) that the tanks DLC didn't add just MBTs...

I had hoped that "tanks" was very colloquial, and simply referred to various armored vehicles - and it seems it did.

I am happy that NATO gets more airmobile firepower (I'd call it a MGS, something like the Stryker MGS is not a tank destroyer).

I'm happy that the AAF fills the AA and artillery gaps it had. I'm happy that it actually has some airmobile assets aside from quadbikes (seriously, the Mohawk should have been able to lift a Strider)...

-I can understand that APS would be hard to model and balance. We can explain it away that missiles have been designed to defeat APS (indeed, there are missiles in development that have countermeasures against APS, but this won't explain why RPG-7s are still effective, but oh well)

 

but...

The Slammer isn't a very good MBT, its some hybrid tank and APC, where one can choose good armor, or good armament, but not both - but always able to hold 6 passengers.

I was hoping for a dedicated NATO MBT, maybe a "stealthy" one that is hard to spot on thermals (active camoflage for thermals is in development for armored vehicles), oh well.

I was also hoping for a tank-drone, the stomper/saif is very soft and vulnerable to SAF, after all.

- these would have fit in with the "tanks" theme better IMO, without rendering the old tanks redundant.

 

CSAT lacked, and still does lack, good armored airmobile or amphibious vehicles. They don't have the blackfish... fine... but the Marid has the weakest armament of the amphibious MRAPs. CSAT airmobile vehicles (Ifrits and Qilins) would be at a severe disadvantage to NATO airmobile marshalls... and even more so with the Rhino out there. At least they got an AT version of the Qilin... but I feel they could have used something like the Nyx more than they needed something to replace the Varsuk. The Qilin is nice, but a 30mm autocannon version of an Ifrit would be awesome (since the Qilin is so vulnerable to SAF, and missiles have a large delay before impact at longer ranges).

 

I do like the other AT technical versions (and the LMG jeep is a nice surprise).

I do like that most NATO vehicles now have a green color scheme option (but IMO this was a shameful omission of Apex, which is now mostly corrected)

I do like the extra color scheme options I've seen for the new assets... the Nyx should visually fit in with NATO assets in a scenario if the scenario maker chooses to give some Nyxs to Nato.

[lexx 1331]

TBH, I always thought it was stupid how the Slammer can pick up 6 passengers. Really wouldn't mind if that just gets removed and instead the tank gets some more armor or firepower or both.

[Wiki 1558]

7 minutes ago, lexx said:

TBH, I always thought it was stupid how the Slammer can pick up 6 passengers. Really wouldn't mind if that just gets removed and instead the tank gets some more armor or firepower or both.

+1

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

7 minutes ago, lexx said:

TBH, I always thought it was stupid how the Slammer can pick up 6 passengers. Really wouldn't mind if that just gets removed and instead the tank gets some more armor or firepower or both.

 

It's because the Merkava Mk4 has a troop compartment in the rear irl.

[Wiki 1558]

1 minute ago, Night515 said:

 

It's because the Merkava Mk4 has a troop compartment in the rear irl.

Ok thx. I just learned something then.

[lexx 1331]

Apparently it even has a 60mm mortar. Cool. Didn't know this either.

[Hvymtal 1251]

All merkavas have the compartment, one of the benefits of the unconventional (for a tank) front engine design. Originally it was for ammo and crew stuff, but when the conflicts in Israel started turning more towards urban warfare they ditched the extra ammo and started using the Merkava as an IFV. I've spoken to a former Israeli soldier; it is a bit of a squeeze to get more than three or four soldiers with all of their crap in there, but it's possible. One of the reasons they started moving to converting Merkavas into APCs (the Namer, or our Panther) instead of Centurions and T-55s is because the front engine and existing passenger compartment made conversion much easier, and afforded more passenger compartment space since there was no need to have a cut-out for the engine, and no driveline tunnel. It helped that it also offered much more protection than a T-55 or Centurion

[jarrad96 1940]

Yes it does, but IRL that's also where a decent amount of the ammo is stored- I think it could be good change if the Slammer's were slightly up-armored and there was additional main gun ammo stored in the rear 'troop' bay instead, maybe cutting it down to 2-4 men instead of 6. The bay was also handy as a rear escape hatch for the crewmen themselves. It being used for infantry transport or medical evac was a secondary role, it was usually full of the Stuff (TM) that would make transporting a full 6 man team impractical. 

 

In real life, the Merkava was very ineffective as a transport vehicle because the whole bay would be full of ammunition and crew supplies, and it wasn't designed to carry infantry, but to be used to pick up crew from another disabled tank/vehicle and deliver them to a safer area. It's somewhat similar in purpose to the Mi-28's emergency troop/crew compartment. That's kind of the reason the Achzarit, Nagmachon and later Namer were built- they wanted something with similar armor to a MBT but was actually useful as a troop transport in and of itself. 

[Zygzak191 52]

Turning in tracked vehicles causes them to accelerate (it also happens in old vehicles), it's easiest to spot it while driving backwards:

 

And a little bonus, for those who haven't seen the true power of Rhino yet:

 

[M. Glade 524]

13 minutes ago, Zygzak191 said:

 

 

And a little bonus, for those who haven't seen the true power of Rhino yet:

 

 

That's an ICBM!

[Hvymtal 1251]

Still doesn't forgive the mobility, but that is awesome!

 

As for the turning acceleration, I think it adds to the derpy-go-lucky character of the Nyx 

[dragon01 902]

1 hour ago, Zygzak191 said:

And a little bonus, for those who haven't seen the true power of Rhino yet:

What was the range on that shot? The real Lahat, on which this ATGM seems to be based on, has a range of about 8km, so this might actually be realistic behavior. :) You could probably pull that shot off with the real Lahat.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Wait, what the heck is happening there? You just fired a shot in the general direction of an enemy vehicle and it flew at a specific altitude until it came close and dived into it?

[darkChozo 133]

I put together a little mobility comparison for the new vehicles. Basically confirms that the Rhino has crappy torque, but it also has a very high top speed, which means it actually ends up being the fastest of the vehicles in a 60 second drag race.

 

 

Also, yeah, the Rhino ATGM is pretty great. Best shot I hit was from Molos Airfield to Paros, which is about 10km. I was able to lock on to a target in Kavala, but the missile despawned before it could hit :(