Buy Iron Front armor penetration and implement in ArmA3

[mr burns 132]

Dear Bohemia,

please for the love of anything, would it be possible for you to arrange a deal with Iron Front developers for you to implement their scipted armor penetration system into ArmA3?

Obviously it would have to be optional (module) since it´s scripted nature might bother people.

Wouldn´t everybody love to finally have an armor penetration system?

I think IF Dev´s wouldnt mind a little sideincome from this either.

Even if it isn´t perfect (by no means at all), it´s several notches above the shitty WoW like healthbar system we´re coping with since years.

For anyone not familiar with the IF penetrations, see results of some tests i made with it, here (german only, sry).

PS: Intentionally not posted in some obscure suggestion thread, i find it a much too important suggestion for not having it´s own thread :)

[SaOk 112]

+1 if there isnt one already coming for A3. Vehicles (also planes) in Iron Front were amazing.

[Moerderhoschi 107]

+1 for this

i would love to see some improvements in the armor penetration system of arma. Implented in the engine would be the best but a scripted solution like in IF would also be a big inprovement.

Please BI give us a better penetration system.

regards

moerderhoschi

[Cultivator 0]

+ 1

Culti wants real Panzers! :)

[NacroxNicke 11]

Modern tank penetrations aren't calculated in the same way as WW2 war armor plates with angles n' stuff.

I think a better locational damage system would be better in this case, as going full realism on modern tanks would potentially make for problems at the stability of the game itself on larger scale battles. Most games that tries to modelate modern tanks just make a statistic database from real life "results" and then they interpolate them to the game, and that works good enough to player needs. Like a check for "Has penetrated?" - "Yes" - "Try dice d20 for different effects based on percentage"

[mr.g-c 6]

Open Ticket about it pleeeease!

[ric 1]

+ 1

Culti wants real Panzers! :)

und panzer's du shall habe :) everyone sing along if you know the lyrics ;) I am sure you know of this site ..but just in case you dont, it is a really good source of info on german ww2 armor http://www.achtungpanzer.com

and to the OP, have you talked to the invassion 44 guys about this?

[Sakai 1]

What I think is more likely if ACE for ArmA 3 will happen... This could happen as well...

[purepassion 22]

I haven't looked into any of the code; I don't know if it's even possible in IF due it also not being moddable and I actually don't own it but I have heard that the implementation was very "hacky" and just about working. Thus, using code from IF might not be a good idea at all.

Nevertheless, your suggestion to implement a more sophisticated and component-driven damage model stil stands and I think there should definitely be some ressources being devoted to it!

Die Deutschen wollen ordentliche Panzer!

:p cheers guys

[heruon 1]

oh yes yes yes please!

[mr.g-c 6]

Anyone remember this?

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?132956-Will-ARMA3-feature-realistic-tank-armor/page11

[NeuroFunker 11]

Anyone remember this?

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?132956-Will-ARMA3-feature-realistic-tank-armor/page11

sounds more like a fantasy to me.

[nodunit 397]

Modern tank penetrations aren't calculated in the same way as WW2 war armor plates with angles n' stuff.

I think a better locational damage system would be better in this case, as going full realism on modern tanks would potentially make for problems at the stability of the game itself on larger scale battles. Most games that tries to modelate modern tanks just make a statistic database from real life "results" and then they interpolate them to the game, and that works good enough to player needs. Like a check for "Has penetrated?" - "Yes" - "Try dice d20 for different effects based on percentage"

No dice rolls please, world of tanks has dice rolls and it is extreme infuriating to shoot a tank in the same spot twice (from the same angle and position) and have the second shot magically not penetrate.

Edited April 21, 2013 by NodUnit

[mr burns 132]

Modern tank penetrations aren't calculated in the same way as WW2 war armor plates with angles n' stuff.

I gotta disagree. The principle of "probability of shot penetrating at angle x with speed y and weight z" (force vs. hull) still applies, even if a shot would happen to penetrate into futuristic composite armor.

The only difference here is the lowered effect of penetrations.

No dice rolls please, world of tanks has dice rolls and it is extreme infuriating to shoot a tank in the same spot twice (from the same angle and position) and have the second shot magically not penetrate.

I didn´t want to mention that game but now that you did, i gotta say even with it´s absurd quirks, WoT is miles ahead of "best military simulator blah blah". Sad story.

[.kju 3245]

What is better in the IF system vs ACE - or isn't the ACE system (especially coding wise) better?

[nodunit 397]

I gotta disagree. The principle of "probability of shot penetrating at angle x with speed y and weight z" (force vs. hull) still applies, even if a shot would happen to penetrate into futuristic composite armor.

The only difference here is the lowered effect of penetrations.

I didn´t want to mention that game but now that you did, i gotta say even with it´s absurd quirks, WoT is miles ahead of "best military simulator blah blah". Sad story.

WOT has excellent tank gameplay (when it's not fucking you over with -5% survivals and pen rolls) of its type I'll give it that, and while I won't compare the two fully since they are going for different things (that would be like comparing steel beasts to DCS, two different focuses I mean) it would be nice to see a few things that the two do well..

Having the gun damaged but not destroyed, thus screwing with aiming (much like infantry arms being wounded) added a lot of tension in distant engagements and being hit in the engine, left to sit idle was nerve wracking.

I'd say one of my favorite and most frustrating things about WOT is the fact that armor and angle matters against lower caliber, the fact that a heavy tank can face off against a lighter tank and laugh as it bounces shells repeteadly, or that the tiger 2 can go toe to toe with some fairly heavy caliber with the right angles off it's upper glacis is a far cry from being able to destroy and M1A2 with a T-34.

Edited April 21, 2013 by NodUnit

[maturin 12]

;2377929']What is better in the IF system vs ACE - or isn't the ACE system (especially coding wise) better?

ACE is modern. It takes into account ERA, HEAT vs KE, etc.

That said, it has serious flaws that are entirely the fault of the engine and their limited access to the code. It is a scripted solution, and the team have identified easy tweaks the devs could make to render a full IF0-style system possible, even by modders.

BI's infuriatingly warped priorities are the only thing standing in the way. Windage and vehicle damage? Fuck no, we need frogmen! Yeah, so we can swim around maybe in 2% of missions. It's not like almost every single hour of gameplay involves some humvee getting hit by an RPG or anything...

[.kju 3245]

So again whats more advanced/better/different in the IF system?

[kremator 1065]

It needs to be in the vanilla game not a third party addon.

[Dwarden 1125]

all what's needed for the IF penetration system is already (since OA 1.6x betas) in engine, configs and scripting ...

[.kju 3245]

and model changes for the IF system - while the ACE does not, right?

[Sakai 1]

And hell If I remember correctly, I used to shot with 50 cal. on a vehicle and that used to penetrate it in ArmA 2, so if that was done in ArmA 2 its more likely gonna be in ArmA 3...

[Bashka_IF 1]

Iron Front is amazing (if you learn how to survive it's bugs), I stopped playing BF3 in favor of IF.

We who play it regularly hope this will be implemented on Arma 3 engine at some point.

PS What really needs to be fixed besides obvious bugs is gamma option, pls vote:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?153526-Client-side-quot-Gamma-quot-hack-needs-to-go&p=2378057#post2378057

[purepassion 22]

;2378054']and model changes for the IF system - while the ACE does not' date=' right?[/quote']

Correct! I think the major difference between the two which actually seems to have the biggest impact/impression is the detailed damage model and single parts being blown off. I guess it just looks more impressive when you actually see the model getting destroyed :)

[mr.g-c 6]

ACE is modern. It takes into account ERA, HEAT vs KE, etc.

That said, it has serious flaws that are entirely the fault of the engine and their limited access to the code. It is a scripted solution, and the team have identified easy tweaks the devs could make to render a full IF0-style system possible, even by modders.

BI's infuriatingly warped priorities are the only thing standing in the way. Windage and vehicle damage? Fuck no, we need frogmen! Yeah, so we can swim around maybe in 2% of missions. It's not like almost every single hour of gameplay involves some humvee getting hit by an RPG or anything...

Well said! Thank you.

IMHO we need to wait another 10 years to get more realism into the ArmA Series, i believe at a point when even the CoD & Co. console kiddie shooters will have it, BIS will implement it.

But wasnt there a statement by a BI Dev lately showing their stance "more against" realism? Something like "In Arma, realism is a tool, not a goal."