Potential DLC Ideas and Proposals

[Alpha Whiskey Romeo 17]

Yeah I know it's early and I know A3 is far from complete, or 100% functional at present, but I thought discussing it would be a great way to gauge the communities opinions on what they'd like to see down the road.

Personally speaking...

• With the fictional future setting, and with NATO essentially on the loosing end, I'd love to have a US based map and relevant content, perhaps on the East Coast where Iranian Forces have made landfall. Obviously the map wouldn't have to be massive but should be large enough to encompass a balanced dispersion of potential forces. I think the idea of fighting a conventional and asymmetric conflict on "Main Street USA" has great potential and would be a lot of fun. Certainly top of my list.
  

• We've had BAF, a German contingent, Czech Forces, and of course the Russians, I think it's time the French got some love.
  

Any other ideas?

EDIT - Could a Mod change the title for me to - Potential DLC Ideas and Proposals. I didn't pick the title...

Edited September 23, 2013 by Alpha Whiskey Romeo

[mistyronin 1181]

To me a DLC should include new features like hovercrafts, more navy units to add more possibilities to combined arms ( maybe not huge ships but some patrol boats with missiles ). So not only new units covering the same functions, but new ingredients for the combined warfare.

About new armies, well a proper German group, France, China, also a futuristic Russia, Israel, could be interesting.

BTW I think the devs were trying to escape from an asymmetric conflict and go back to a more symmetric / balanced one. In any case one of the last battlegrounds would be US soil. Given the actual premise ( CSAT vs NATO ) seems more logical more Mediterranean, Middle East and Eastern Europe ( as they are the land between both contestants ).

[Alpha Whiskey Romeo 17]

To me a DLC should include new features like hovercrafts, more navy units to add more possibilities to combined arms ( maybe not huge ships but some patrol boats with missiles ). So not only new units covering the same functions, but new ingredients for the combined warfare.

Naval units are present to some extent, or at least I hope they will be i.e. Astute Class Submarine. As for the LCAC, well, for those of us that own VBS2 we already have it, and it's little if any use. Fun to drive around with for a 10 minutes or so... Two larger surface vessels would be nice.

About new armies, well a proper German group, France, China, also a futuristic Russia, Israel, could be interesting.

BTW I think the devs were trying to escape from an asymmetric conflict and go back to a more symmetric / balanced one. In any case one of the last battlegrounds would be US soil. Given the actual premise ( CSAT vs NATO ) seems more logical more Mediterranean, Middle East and Eastern Europe ( as they are the land between both contestants ).

A3 already contains a fully modeled Insurgent group, so it's not beyond the realm for implementation. As for logicality, it doesn't matter here. There isn't much about A3 that's either logical or systemically possible in it's current setting. The devs have stated numerous times that the ArmA series doesn't follow any semblance of reality relating to geo-politics. The worlds they design are completely within their own historical context.

[Wisp 10]

I think Korea would be a really cool setting. It's a lot more lush than the dry Altis, and the factions are obvious. DPRK vs. US.

[mistyronin 1181]

There isn't much about A3 that's either logical or systemically possible in it's current setting. The devs have stated numerous times that the ArmA series doesn't follow any semblance of reality relating to geo-politics. The worlds they design are completely within their own historical context.

Well, BI though not following any historical context... until now, they have based to some degree all their games and equipment in historical points (for example Chernarus seem to have some connections with Georgia, Takistan with Irak, Altis with Cyprus, etc. ). And in all cases the creative freedom has never went beyond the border of a "possible/believable reality".

So IMO and judging by BI previous steps, take the war in US soil would have no reason, specially having in mind the actual premise CSAT vs NATO; Iran has not even in their sweetest dreams capabilities to invade the US.

IMO the only country hat could have a little chance would be Russia. Unless something really bad happens in America ( like the atomic attack in Jericho TV series ).

A conflict involving Korea as Wisp said would be more an interesting possibility.

[dmarkwick 261]

Well, BI though not following any historical context... until now, they have based to some degree all their games and equipment in historical points (for example Chernarus seem to have some connections with Georgia, Takistan with Irak, Altis with Cyprus, etc. ). And in all cases the creative freedom has never went beyond the border of a "possible/believable reality".

So IMO and judging by BI previous steps, take the war in US soil would have no reason, specially having in mind the actual premise CSAT vs NATO; Iran has not even in their sweetest dreams capabilities to invade the US.

IMO the only country hat could have a little chance would be Russia. Unless something really bad happens in America ( like the atomic attack in Jericho TV series ).

A conflict involving Korea as Wisp said would be more an interesting possibility.

I'd be less interested in the real-life practicalities of a US soil invasion and more interested in the gameplay possibilities. It's doesn't need to be US soil as in US mainland, it could be fictional US island in the style of how Jersey/Channel Islands/Gibraltar etc are related to the UK, something like Bermuda or Hawaii maybe.

[RushHour 11]

I´d like to see a Manhattan type map with enterable skyscrapers etc.

[ProfTournesol 956]

EDIT - Could a Mod change the title for me to - Potential DLC Ideas and Proposals. I didn't pick the title...

Report your original post to the moderators and ask for the change.

[Zorg_DK 10]

My top 3 wishlist for dlc:

1. Naval dlc, with some different ships and submarines.

2. Tank / apc dlc with modeled interiors.

3. A jungle map.

[mistyronin 1181]

I'd be less interested in the real-life practicalities of a US soil invasion and more interested in the gameplay possibilities. It's doesn't need to be US soil as in US mainland, it could be fictional US island in the style of how Jersey/Channel Islands/Gibraltar etc are related to the UK, something like Bermuda or Hawaii maybe.

Uhm Gibraltar would have lots of possibilities, its almost an island... Don't tell to the mates of the FFAA mod...

[[evo] dan 79]

To me a DLC should include new features like hovercrafts, more navy units to add more possibilities to combined arms ( maybe not huge ships but some patrol boats with missiles ). So not only new units covering the same functions, but new ingredients for the combined warfare.

About new armies, well a proper German group, France, China, also a futuristic Russia, Israel, could be interesting.

BTW I think the devs were trying to escape from an asymmetric conflict and go back to a more symmetric / balanced one. In any case one of the last battlegrounds would be US soil. Given the actual premise ( CSAT vs NATO ) seems more logical more Mediterranean, Middle East and Eastern Europe ( as they are the land between both contestants ).

^this, although I think I would reserve big naval units, lcac's and marine crop for a 'Pacific Atol' expansion pack.

[zukov 483]

why not sub saharan Africa

[cozza 24]

South East Asia.

Arma has never really been to the jungle. Chinese CSAT forces and Chinese insurgents trying to overthrow............Malaysia. That way you can add British troops aswell (And Australians :D )

[ProfTournesol 956]

Well, this shouldn't confused with the next ArmA(4) settings. ArmA3 DLC will probably only add new troops / campaign as ArmA2 DLC did.

[mistyronin 1181]

Well, this shouldn't confused with the next ArmA(4) settings. ArmA3 DLC will probably only add new troops / campaign as ArmA2 DLC did.

Well A2 expansion added a new battlefield ( takistan ) and the dlcs a few more little maps.

[papanowel 120]

A first DLC with a focus on naval things (+improvement) with new SF unit like the SBS or commando marine would be cool.

Harpoon weapon, bigger and useful boat, etc.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

It's doesn't need to be US soil as in US mainland, it could be fictional US island in the style of how Jersey/Channel Islands/Gibraltar etc are related to the UK, something like Bermuda or Hawaii maybe.

Why fictional? The US has plenty of dependencies and overseas territories.

They have Guam, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana Islands, US Virgin Islands, American Samoa and Guantanamo Bay just to name a few

[dmarkwick 261]

Why fictional? The US has plenty of dependencies and overseas territories.

They have Guam, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana Islands, US Virgin Islands, American Samoa and Guantanamo Bay just to name a few

Fictional for two reasons:

1. It's the way BIS seem to do things, they make a fictional place based on real-world terrain. So any suitable island mass, but with US style buildings and cultural heritage.

2. To reduce possible sensitivity regarding practicalities. (Is about as non-committal as I can go with that ;))

[Crierd 24]

As mentioned above DLC will probably not be engine upgrades, but rather units, maps, etc. I am still very hopeful for some varied terrain like swamps, muddy ground, snow, lakes, streams, rivers, etc. Other than that, we definitely need some Israeli mushroom hats, and a map with several fragmented islands, like something you'd see in Indonesia or ya know...Greece. More units and assets in general is pretty much a given, as mentioned above, south eastern Asia would be awesome. I can just imagine how beautiful and scary a triple canopy jungle would be in the middle of the night with A3's new lighting, your only source for light being a few moonlit slivers here and there with bursts of gunfire and muzzle flashes all around.

[trent 14]

I would prefer extensive enhacements to existing factions (like everyone getting a big naval pack as mentioned) rather then the BAF, ACR DLCs that added new factions that all required their equivalents of helemts, vests, jeeps & APCs to be added, which didn't really change anything in the game.

[LoneCrow66 10]

I'll tell you this.. whatever dlc they put out better be free after this campaign debacle

[.Taffy 10]

The background story could provide an interesting basis to build off.

- The old background may or may not still be relevant as it all depends on how BI intend the campaign story to play out. It mentioned the conflict having expanded into central Europe already and then pushed back. Perhaps, if the campaign ends with a loss of sorts for the player and CSAT continue their march then any expansion or DLC could cover this. The "First Battle of Brno" was mentioned in the old background description, perhaps an urban map with a campaign about this would be good.

- Also described in the game's background is the fact US involvement in the Altis conflict, at least initially, is limited as the US is busy fighting proxy wars in Asia against China. Perhaps DLC could see us taking on the role of special operators working with local armies and rebel groups.

[Fulcrum90 10]

In my opinion ArmA III falls short content-wise in three areas:

1) No planes (Especially Non-CAS planes...We finally have beautiful 3D clouds, but nothing to explore them)

2) No unique enough OPFOR with really distinctively different equipment

3) No military "doodads". Stuff thats easily forgotten, but appears in every modern conflict. (SAM sites, radar stations, bunkers...).

As a proof how important point 3) is I created a little "story" in the Screenshot thread, using only Non-CAS planes and ground objects. I know ArmA is supposed to be an Infantry simulator, but still you could create hundreds of missions and stories with those objects and planes!

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?73572-ArmA-II-amp-OA-Photography-I-No-images-over-100kb-Pictures-only-NO-comments&p=2515438&viewfull=1#post2515438

[BadHabitz 235]

I'll tell you this.. whatever dlc they put out better be free after this campaign debacle

The free stuff you'll get will be the stuff they couldn't finish on time. There might be some other freebies along the way, but for the most part the future DLC's you'll have to pay for, or I want a partial refund for my Supporter Edition.

[smokedog3para 365]

whole factions not like the oa dlcs, take the baf dlc for example new baf units 2x jackal 1x warrior 4x air it just did not seem much for a dlc I know it was only £8.00 but I would of paid much more to have a full faction like support vehicles ammo, fuel, medic, logistic vehicles, fast air, would of been better representation of a faction as I and many more friends think that would of been better and maybe sold a bit more

Also if the new dlc's come with a mini campaign make them work out the box pmc was bad baf was bad acr even worse still not fixed and I have not finished it yet .