General Discussion (dev branch)

[Electricleash 133]

It's been there since sometime last year. To my knowledge it wasn't mentioned in any of the changelogs though. Nice little surprise.

[R3vo 2652]

Wasn't it added with Tac Ops?

[D_Donskoy 50]

1 hour ago, R3vo said:

Wasn't it added with Tac Ops?

No. It was add last year.

[twistking 204]

so, since the new camo nets for vehicles will reduce your heat signature, will that also work for AI or only human players?

in other words, does AI with thermal capabilities (thermal weapon-scope, vehicles with thermal sights, but no automatic "sensor array") have spotting capabilities dependant on varying heat signature?

 

i did some very quick tests back when jet dlc released, but did not get definite results... (a tank is obviously still a big target, even when cold...)

[Strike_NOR 898]

I suspect the camo nets are largely there for visual variation as I have not seen any connection/link to vehicle detectability for sensors or AI.

 

I have asked the devs for this, but not really got an answer, but I do believe they make a difference in what you, as a human player, will see in IR mode and therefore how hard it is to detect you.

[ski2060 167]

Strike_NOR, have you seen today's tweak about interior geometry not overlapping crew fire geometry?
Possibly a fix for all the external damage killing crew without penetrating the vehicle?

 

[Strike_NOR 898]

53 minutes ago, ski2060 said:

Strike_NOR, have you seen today's tweak about interior geometry not overlapping crew fire geometry?
Possibly a fix for all the external damage killing crew without penetrating the vehicle?

 

 

Yeah, I don't know. Will have to perform tests - I am working on something else at the moment, maybe I'll have something to show for tonight :)

[twistking 204]

1 hour ago, Strike_NOR said:

I suspect the camo nets are largely there for visual variation as I have not seen any connection/link to vehicle detectability for sensors or AI.

 

I have asked the devs for this, but not really got an answer, but I do believe they make a difference in what you, as a human player, will see in IR mode and therefore how hard it is to detect you.

 

the question is, if IR detection is based on some config/variable, or if detection probability is somehow taken directly from the brightness value of the thermal texture, in which case there would not be a seperate config linking the nets to AI detection.

the latter does seem a bit to sophisticated to be true, but i would not rule it out...

[Alwarren 2765]

On 27.3.2018 at 12:20 PM, lexx said:

I'm curious, is it even possible for "generic folks" to get a full vehicle crew in multiplayer? All the times I played online and had matches where vehicles were a thing at all, everyone used their own.

 

Play with a Coop-oriented clan, and you'll get there in no time :)

[heavygunner 179]

Anybody else experience crashes in the Tank Destroyer showcase when engaging the tanks coming after you shot the spotter? Especially when firing your main cannon and hitting them? Could be my system, but outside of this mission everything seems fine. Full system crash btw.

[dragon01 902]

8 hours ago, Strike_NOR said:

I suspect the camo nets are largely there for visual variation as I have not seen any connection/link to vehicle detectability for sensors or AI.

 

I have asked the devs for this, but not really got an answer, but I do believe they make a difference in what you, as a human player, will see in IR mode and therefore how hard it is to detect you.

Well, they're definitely good for visual camouflage. On Tanoa, especially, compare Green Hex tanks with and without camo nets. The latter are definitely harder to spot, especially at a distance. Didn't test in NV, but I'd expect similar results. If it doesn't affect AI, it definitely should.

[POLPOX 766]

configfile >> "CfgGroups" >> "Indep" >> "IND_G_F" >> "Infantry" >> "I_G_InfTeam_Light" >> "name"
configfile >> "CfgGroups" >> "East" >> "OPF_G_F" >> "Infantry" >> "O_G_InfTeam_Light" >> "name"

 

These are unlocalized.

[a_killer_wombat 120]

This request is coming perhaps too late to be included when Tanks DLC hits 11th April but I hope that the devs will at least consider it for a post DLC patch.

 

If the player is in the gunner or driver seat of an AFV while an AI is in the commander seat, please could you let the player "command" the AI in the commander seat to pop smoke countermeasure by pressing C?

 

I've found when playing singleplayer scenarios with AI crewmen in an AFV, playing from the commander seat 100% of the time is not always practical due to the clunky-ness of ordering the AI gunner to shoot exactly how and when I want him to shoot. This means that there are many times when I will switch to the gunner seat to take manual control. However, I've experienced much frustration when an enemy happens to fire an ATGM at me while I'm in the gunner seat and, despite the fact that I still have an AI crewman in the commander seat, the AI doesn't automatically react and pop the smoke countermeasure like the AI normally do. The only way to respond at the moment is to try to quickly switch back to the commander seat and pop the smoke countermeasure before the missile is close enough to hit. As you can guess, this often results in failure.

 

The player already has the ability to "command" the AI driver from the gunner or commander seats using WASD, why shouldn't we also allow the player to "command" the AI to pop smoke using C?

 

 

[fn_Quiksilver 1633]

 

opportunity for new engine function?

 

"setPiPViewDistance" ?

[[VW]Wrath 63]

Wasn't there an option a little while back to set PiP distance in the options out to 12k?

[pils 49]

Regarding Arma 3 Tanks DLC

Medium caliber penetration inconsistency (non-AP/APFSDS projectiles)

 

 

Latest dev version. The Gorgon is just an example, you get the same results with any 30 mm cannon.

 

All medium caliber ammunition, including the one used in the new vehicles, (30 mm MP-T, 20 mm HE, 35mm AA, etc.) can penetrate certain objects - which is great. But there has been this one inconsistency for years and it's still there: 40 mm GPR-T has no penetration, it can't even penetrate some shabby sheet metal.

 

Your military advisors probably told you, that the real projectile - 40 mm GPR-PD-T is its real name - will detonate upon impact (PD = Point Detonating), while the 30 mm MP shells do have a delayed detonation fuse mechanism in real life.

That is correct, however the 40 mm GPR-PD-T carries enough kinetic energy to easily punch through objects/walls and even though it's detonating at the same time, will have an effect on anyone behind that object/wall: It will throw a bunch of shrapnel at them - according to the manufacturer.

Here authentic manufacturer data:

Manufacturer datasheet (There are two versions of the GPR shells: GPR-PD [Point Detonating] and GPR-AB [Air Burst]. It's safe to assume we're using the GPR-PD in Arma 3.)

 

Quote

"The General Purpose Round Point Detonating – Tracer (GPR-PD-T) is a High explosive munition capable of penetrating more than 210 mm of double reinforced concrete. The unique projectile is optimised for fragmentation effects.

The significant “behind protection” effects of this munition delivers effective suppression of threats in urban structures and lightly armoured vehicles.

 

CHARACTERISTICS 

DIMENSIONS 65 x 255 mm [Note added by pils: It's 'telescoped ammunition', the caliber of the actual round is 40mm]
AMMUNITION MASS 2400 g
PROJECTILE MASS 980 g
INITIAL VELOCITY 1000 m/s
ACCURACY 0,5 mil
PERFORATION > 210 mm concrete at 1000 m, > 15 mm RHA at 1000 m
EFFECTIVE RANGE 2500 m"

 

So in short: 

• Please rework the penetration values of the 40 mm GPR-T. It should be able to penetrate one major concrete wall (21 cm!) and cause damage to infantry behind the wall.

[pils 49]

Regarding Arma 3 Tanks DLC

Large caliber penetration inconsistency (non-AP/APFSDS projectiles)

 

 

Latest dev version. Kuma and Angara are just examples, you will get the same result with any vehicle that fires large caliber shells.

 

I've noticed you increased the damage of large caliber HE and HEAT shells to buildings a lot. So in most cases, you can blow a part of the building away with two, sometimes even one large caliber HE shell. 

I like that change a lot and therefore this issue is not as urgent as the one I've posted above.

In fact I'm quite satisfied with your solution: No penetration but high damage to buildings, so you can quickly blow a part of the building away.

I also love your work on the improved explosion damage effect you introduced a few patches ago.

 

The only downside is the fact, that there is no “behind protection” effect (like the military contractor CTA International called it above  ) in case of very strong buildings (e.g. the barracks building) which need multiple large caliber HE hits to be destroyed and even then there's often unharmed infantry left inside ... as well as in case of all indestructible buildings/objects (e.g. the office building).

It's simply a bit frustrating and immersion breaking if your 30 mm MP shells will penetrate into buildings so nicely while the much more powerful 120 mm HE/HEAT/HEAT-MP can't even penetrate some shabby sheet metal.

 

• Please consider reworking the large caliber HE/HEAT/HEAT-MP shell penetration:
  • Large caliber HE shells should be able to penetrate at least one major reinforced concrete wall.
    • All modern large caliber HE shells do have a delayed detonation fuse mechanism (I can post a manufacturer datasheet if necessary)

  • Large caliber HEAT shells should be able to penetrate at least one major reinforced concrete wall and deal damage to infantry behind it. 

    •  HEAT/HEAT tandem warhead principle -> penetrate hard matter and shower everyone behind with molten metal/shrapnel*

 

*introducing this to shells would mean it's necessary to apply the same to rockets/missiles with HEAT warheads at some point ... in some patch ... eventually  

 

 

@Mods: Please consider not to put those two posts together, since it's two different issues. Imho it's clearer to use two posts.

[Strike_NOR 898]

Been trying to ask about this for a while now, especially when I heard that Tanks DLC was heading our way.

 

The thing is, it's hardcoded in the engine right now I believe, that if you give an ammunition type an explosive value of 0.7 or higher, then the shell will detonate on impact. If you give it less, then it will penetrate, may cause an explosion effect, but it will keep penetrating and exploding multiple times every time it hits. This could be seen for some HE shells that can ricochet, where the shell "explodes" on the ricochet, then explodes again on the next impact.

 

Unfortunately, there is a second issue here, which is the timed delay fuze. AFAIK, there is no "supported" or reliable way to incorporate explosion delay to a shot (projectile) and make it start counting down from hit until either A: it does not penetrate and subsequently explodes on impact, or B: penetrates then explodes after X amount of milliseconds.

 

By using a submunition that activates "onHit", you can despawn the original shell, then make a new HE shell spawn X amount of meters behind the original shell to "fake" penetration, and have it explode immediately. This would probably work well with walls, but there would be no penetration mechanic/calculation, meaning it would always spawn X meters behind wall. When vehicles come into play, this would also happen. Even if vehicle armor was thick enough to stop it (theoretically), this type of "workaround" would ignore that, and just spawn the same X amount of meters inside a vehicle.

 

And speaking of vehicles, HE shells/explosive weapons have NO way of dealing splash damage directly to vehicle crew members. In ArmA 3, a fixed hit value is dealt to the vehicle, based upon how many hitpoints are influenced by the explosive radius (splash damage/indirectHit range in arma 3 terms). Then this final damage is transferred by a factor to the crew. So to make a crude example. Vehicle takes 50% damage from an explosive = crew suffers 0.5 of that which equals 25% HP loss. That's kind of how it works.

 

Realistically speaking, an explosive shell detonating on surface would shake the vehicle/wall and explosive force would either break it, or transmit the blast waves through the wall (which is why you never lean against a bunker wall or tank interior during bombardment). In the case where the explosive is delayed, and has enough kinetic energy to break through (penetrate) a wall or tank armor, the effect becomes way more deadly because the pressure is contained inside a room or vehicle hull. At this point, the pressure would more than likely exceed the lethal values for humans, and probably exceed the structural integrity limits of buildings or vehicles and rip them apart.

 

I understand what you seek is a simulation of the latter example, where explosions in confined spaces deal greater damage than on the exterior, and there exists a possibility of penetrating said spaces with HE weapons (missiles included). This is probably not officially going to happen for ArmA 3, I'm afraid. However, modding/scripting may be able to pull something like that off - for specific situations. Not sure if you can make HE penetration work "across the board" (meaning vs various materials, angles and thicknesses).

[HaseDesTodes 62]

8 minutes ago, Strike_NOR said:

The thing is, it's hardcoded in the engine right now I believe, that if you give an ammunition type an explosive value of 0.7 or higher, then the shell will detonate on impact. If you give it less, then it will penetrate, may cause an explosion effect, but it will keep penetrating and exploding multiple times every time it hits. This could be seen for some HE shells that can ricochet, where the shell "explodes" on the ricochet, then explodes again on the next impact.

 

since you already mentioned it...

i was wondering if you have noticed if ricocheting HEAT shells are creating the penetrating jet, everytime they impact, or only at the first/last time.

did you test it or observe something like this already?

[pils 49]

8 hours ago, Strike_NOR said:

The thing is, it's hardcoded in the engine right now I believe, that if you give an ammunition type an explosive value of 0.7 or higher, then the shell will detonate on impact. If you give it less, then it will penetrate, may cause an explosion effect, but it will keep penetrating and exploding multiple times every time it hits. This could be seen for some HE shells that can ricochet, where the shell "explodes" on the ricochet, then explodes again on the next impact.

 

Yea, I've noticed the HE shells bouncing off the ground and exploding twice, too.

However, I did some testing in June 2017. I'm not entirely sure if they did anything to the system since then.

But back then, I discovered something really interesting:

 

I fired numerous rounds through the wood panels. Both the 20 mm HE and the 30 mm MP penetrated through all panels and hit the building in the back. 

In case of the 30 mm MP, there was an explosion effect at the panels.

In case of the 20 mm HE, there was no explosion effect at the panels.

In both cases, the guys inbetween the panels were not harmed! The damage occurred only at the spot the bullet was unable to penetrate - at the building in the back. I have no clue how BIS did that, but it's awesome. I have also no clue why there were explosion effects with the 30 mm MP, but not with the 20 mm HE.

 

 

 

 

8 hours ago, Strike_NOR said:

Unfortunately, there is a second issue here, which is the timed delay fuze. AFAIK, there is no "supported" or reliable way to incorporate explosion delay to a shot (projectile) and make it start counting down from hit until either A: it does not penetrate and subsequently explodes on impact, or B: penetrates then explodes after X amount of milliseconds.

 

Yea, I thought so. But that's ok I guess if there is a decent workaround.

 

8 hours ago, Strike_NOR said:

And speaking of vehicles, HE shells/explosive weapons have NO way of dealing splash damage directly to vehicle crew members. In ArmA 3, a fixed hit value is dealt to the vehicle, based upon how many hitpoints are influenced by the explosive radius (splash damage/indirectHit range in arma 3 terms). Then this final damage is transferred by a factor to the crew. So to make a crude example. Vehicle takes 50% damage from an explosive = crew suffers 0.5 of that which equals 25% HP loss. That's kind of how it works.

 

I understand what you seek is a simulation of the latter example, where explosions in confined spaces deal greater damage than on the exterior, and there exists a possibility of penetrating said spaces with HE weapons (missiles included). This is probably not officially going to happen for ArmA 3, I'm afraid. 

 

That's alright, too. I really don't demand something overly fancy. It's Arma after all. :D

• I'd be satisfied if the 40 mm GPR could penetrate objects/walls like the 30 mm MP can.
• I'd be amazed if additionally the large caliber HE shells could penetrate e.g. into buildings as well.
• I'd be thrilled if additionally HEAT warheads would deal damage to infantry behind an object/wall the warhead is impacting into.

[Strike_NOR 898]

9 hours ago, HaseDesTodes said:

 

i was wondering if you have noticed if ricocheting HEAT shells are creating the penetrating jet, everytime they impact, or only at the first/last time.

From my tests, a weapon will only spawn submunitions the first time they hit something. 

 

Secondly. I think the "parent ammunition" has explosive value over 0.7 now which means that it will disappear upon first impact.

 

Lastly, ammo config also has a parameter for deflection angle. It is used to limit ricochets to only happen if the impact angle is below said value. So typically an APFSDS dart will have a very low angle for ricochet chance, an AP shell more, and HE shells typically 0 (meaning no chance of ricochet, only impact detonation). I do howerver believe some BI ammo (like 20mm HE) are partly explosive, meaning they can penetrate, or ricochet, and at the same time explode on each hit.

[x3kj 1247]

7 hours ago, pils said:

Yea, I've noticed the HE shells bouncing off the ground and exploding twice, too.

On the Nyx Autocannon this effect is gone - at least visually. Idk if this is result of an engine change or just config parameters. And idk if they still do indirect damage on ricochet or if its not just purely visual.

 

 

[pils 49]

2 minutes ago, x3kj said:

double/triple exploding HE rounds are a thing of the past - at least visually. I havent tested if they still do indirect damage on ricochet

Perfect!

Damage-wise it seems it was already perfect in June 2017.

As said, I fired through the wood panels (30 mm MP was still showing explosion effects back then) and the guys weren't harmed a bit.

The damage only occurred at the building in the back.

[x3kj 1247]

1 minute ago, pils said:

Perfect!

At least on the Nyx autocannon - maybe it's just a config value, but i think this should (tm) apply generally -> confirmation appreciated.

 

Time delayed HE action could potentially be possible if submunition is used -> cannon fires inert projectile which upon impact creates a submunition with explosive parameter, but with short time to live. This relies on the assumption that the submunition explodes after time runs out - which i'm not sure if this is the case. If not it would complicate matters and would require submunition within submunition, if that is even a thing of possibility -> first for inert projectile, second for "penetrating projectile" with time to live, which then spawns another projectile that immediately explodes... 

[blindside 24]

I am just coming here to commend Bohemia Interactive on how they are getting much better at designing missions. So far I've been having a really good time with Tac-Ops missions playing them in multiple different ways, and the Tanks DLC missions along with the showcases. They've been a lot of fun and I love getting immersed into the conflict of ArmA 3 with it's storyline. Really good job BI with these new missions. They have great pace, fun gameplay, great story, and overall just feel really great to play.