CSAT and NATO are not believable

[progamer 14]

I find it odd that vehicles which are noticeably from a specific country do not have the countries flag or the country's flag on their uniform.

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=15518

Edited October 19, 2013 by ProGamer

[ck-claw 1]

Prehaps thats how things turn out in 2035?

Hell-at this time of night, i believe all cider should be given free for medicinal purposes!!

[progamer 14]

Prehaps thats how things turn out in 2035?

Hell-at this time of night, i believe all cider should be given free for medicinal purposes!!

Saying its the future does not magically make the US operate another countries vehicles. Makes no sense regardless of it being in the future or the past.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

@ProGamer

It does make sense for NATO to adapt the Markava. The Israeli's have designed the Markava MBT using the best features from tanks all over the world. Germans, American, Canadian, and Russian tank features. Don't remember them all. About all the other things, i have no idea.

[progamer 14]

@ProGamer

It does make sense for NATO to adapt the Markava. The Israeli's have designed the Markava MBT using the best features from tanks all over the world. Germans, American, Canadian, and Russian tank features. Don't remember them all. About all the other things, i have no idea.

NATO yes, but NATO is made up of different countries using their technology. NATO would have an Israeli tank platoon backed up by US air force for example.

---------- Post added at 23:32 ---------- Previous post was at 23:13 ----------

What we have now is just a mosh pit of assets that need to be grouped by country of origin.

[froggyluv 2136]

Well maybe the campaign will explain who has what and why.....or not :rolleyes:

As long as the mission I'm playing has 95% of the headgear removed or replaced I'm happy.

[xendance 3]

Using :mad: in title -> instant ignore

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

@ProGamer

Ok, good point there. Than again, Maybe is is a design off the Markava, it doesn't look "Exactly" like the Markava, but has many distinct features of it... not sure. But i see what you got there. My solution was to have Factions within NATO, without straying too too far from the dedicated mindset of the original content.

[progamer 14]

Using :mad: in title -> instant ignore

? The little smiley face means nothing in threads really. :) either I suck at reading sarcasm or you do not realize I am a huge advocate for realism in arma 3.

---------- Post added at 23:48 ---------- Previous post was at 23:45 ----------

@ProGamer

Ok, good point there. Than again, Maybe is is a design off the Markava, it doesn't look "Exactly" like the Markava, but has many distinct features of it... not sure. But i see what you got there. My solution was to have Factions within NATO, without straying too too far from the dedicated mindset of the original content.

Currently in game, US soldiers drives Israeli armor. The Chinese, Russians, and Turkish all share everything like a huge mosh pit. you seem to think arma 2's realistic solution of splitting assets by country of origin is not really important. But for immersion of assets, it's insanely important. You don't see a game were you fight as Americans in chinese vehicles and aircraft now do you? Arma 3 is just a downgrade in this aspect currently.

---------- Post added at 00:07 ---------- Previous post was at 23:48 ----------

Even just giving the merkava tank crew an Israeli flag on there uniforms and other flags to applicable vehicle operators would be nice.

Edited October 18, 2013 by ProGamer

[Smurf 12]

Let's wait for "Survive" ?

[progamer 14]

Let's wait for "Survive" ?

I doubt the issue is addressed in the first campaign episode.

[metalcraze 290]

The real truth and a major plot twist is that CSAT and NATO are exactly the same army.

[progamer 14]

The real truth and a major plot twist is that CSAT and NATO are exactly the same army.

We just need to wait and see...

A nice start would be giving country if origin flags to the crewmen of country specific vehicles: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=15523

Edited October 19, 2013 by ProGamer

[antoineflemming 14]

It has come to my attention tha the two factions just make no sense. Why would the US have Israeli Armor? Why would the Russians, Chinese and Turkish all share everything equally? It just makes no sense. Arma 2 solved this by putting units into sections under faction based on country of origin. This is something Arma 2 has done better, and is much more realistic. It breaks the immersion playing as a US infantry man with US soldiers driving Israeli Armor.

Even just giving the merkava tank crew an Israeli flag on there uniforms and other flags to applicable vehicle operators would be nice.

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=15518

There are no Chinese or Turkish factions in the game. What are you on about? Are you seriously that pissed about playing as a US soldier? Funny how you don't complain about the many many nations that use US vehicles, armor, and equipment and how they should all be manned by US personnel. The very simple answer is that when the world economy tanks in the Armaverse, Israel sells equipment to NATO. It's that simple. If you are really that annoyed about playing as US soldiers that you had to make a thread about it, then maybe you should take a break. Or, better yet, go download the very good IDF addon and request that BIS put a bunch of nations in a DLC. But the whining doesn't help.

[progamer 14]

There are no Chinese or Turkish factions in the game. What are you on about? Are you seriously that pissed about playing as a US soldier? Funny how you don't complain about the many many nations that use US vehicles, armor, and equipment and how they should all be manned by US personnel. The very simple answer is that when the world economy tanks in the Armaverse, Israel sells equipment to NATO. It's that simple. If you are really that annoyed about playing as US soldiers that you had to make a thread about it, then maybe you should take a break. Or, better yet, go download the very good IDF addon and request that BIS put a bunch of nations in a DLC. But the whining doesn't help.

I have adjusted my wording of the issue. I do not hate the US, I just liked how arma 2 had units grouped by country.

[antoineflemming 14]

I have adjusted my wording of the issue. I do not hate the US, I just liked how arma 2 had units grouped by country.

Yeah, that was really nice. I do wish they'd add in other nations, and I think they should have stuck a little more closely to the original story (having Miller (British SBS) be the main character and not Kerry (US 7ID)).

[EvilDutch 1]

Oh dear, the Netherlands that bought USAF Jets for our DAF must be ashamed then i guess ??.

[progamer 14]

Oh dear, the Netherlands that bought USAF Jets for our DAF must be ashamed then i guess ??.

What? How did you get that from this?

[odie0351 67]

Being as they're already off to a good start I wish they would just go ahead and make an Israeli faction...or give the Merkava and all its spinoffs to the greenfor faction and make some proper American armor and support vehicles. Not gonna get into the whole who's tank is better argument cause I'm pretty sure there are already several threads opened just for that purpose but there is no way an American military force [and that's what the NATO faction in game is right now, US infantry/US armor crews/US pilots=US faction like it or not] is going to be using a foreign MBT that's an older or just as old design as the abrams, its just not gonna happen. Don't get me wrong I like the merkava series and I certainly like seeing them in game...just not as an American tank! I'd prefer some futuristic version of the Abrams, maybe rocking a 140mm and there are plenty of other APC/IFV concepts to choose from besides the Namer as well.

[progamer 14]

Being as they're already off to a good start I wish they would just go ahead and make an Israeli faction...or give the Merkava and all its spinoffs to the greenfor faction and make some proper American armor and support vehicles. Not gonna get into the whole who's tank is better argument cause I'm pretty sure there are already several threads opened just for that purpose but there is no way an American military force [and that's what the NATO faction in game is right now, US infantry/US armor crews/US pilots=US faction like it or not] is going to be using a foreign MBT that's an older or just as old design as the abrams, its just not gonna happen. Don't get me wrong I like the merkava series and I certainly like seeing them in game...just not as an American tank! I'd prefer some futuristic version of the Abrams, maybe rocking a 140mm and there are plenty of other APC/IFV concepts to choose from besides the Namer as well.

We have multiple Israeli vehicles, why not group them like Arma 2?

[EvilDutch 1]

What? How did you get that from this?

Well Soldier, that is simple.. The game shows it's 2035, and as you sad before "It does make sense for NATO to adapt the Markava. The Israeli's have designed the Markava MBT". Well the USAF Jets are designed by the US and soon we will have those jets cause we bought them. Who knows what country will have the US Tanks in 2035, cause i don't know? It's all about a nations economy, we buy we sell.. And personally i think they kinda designed the game that way.

[odie0351 67]

We have multiple Israeli vehicles, why not group them like Arma 2?

Exactly

Also continuing off what I said about giving all the Merkava based vehicles to Greenfor, since AAF is supposedly collaborating with CSAT to an extent in the story it would make it easier to explain the copy and paste turrets on the AA and self propelled Artillery vehicles as a midlife upgrade for their support vehicles. Just a thought;)

Edited October 19, 2013 by Odie0351

[13islucky 10]

I just found some UK uniforms used by some of the Men(Story) in NATO. Didn't look like any camo I've seen before but it might be a sign of things to come, like more countries represented in NATO.

[mistyronin 1181]

Saying its the future does not magically make the US operate another countries vehicles. Makes no sense regardless of it being in the future or the past.

Armies use equipment that they think fits better they needs, some of them bought from other countries, so it wouldn't be odd that the US bought Merkavas or Namer ( in fact the US Army studied buying the isreali Namer ). In the case of the finnish Patria, the US Marines have already ordered more than 1000 ( adapted by Lockheed Martin ).

Normally in the US they tend to adapt a bit the vehicle to their suit better their need, like the british Harrier, british BAE Hawk adapted to T45 Ghoshawk or the M249 ( which is a belgium FN Minimi ), but you find some cases as it is like the Swiss Mowag piranha used by the US Marines.

Same with Iran ( in fact Iran uses vehicles from a lot of countries, even from US origin nowadays ), so yeah the BI 2035 idea would make perfect sense. Specially if we have in mind that more and more to reduce costs some vehicles are shared between countries so it ends being cheaper for all ( Eurocopter tiger, Airbus A400, F35, etc. )

Edited October 19, 2013 by MistyRonin

[antoineflemming 14]

I just found some UK uniforms used by some of the Men(Story) in NATO. Didn't look like any camo I've seen before but it might be a sign of things to come, like more countries represented in NATO.

Nope, the UKSF as a part of CTRG were planned for the game back in 2011. The guy in that camo (looks like a triangular splinter camo) in one of the released screens for the campaign is CPT Miller, and he was originally going to be the main character. So, it's not signs of things to come unfortunately.