when will new arma 3 content be out?

[papanowel 120]

That's only Papanowel's speculation, notice how the actual SITREP is far more vague and only says "vehicle"?

Vague, you should read this one then.

My bad, I said MBT instead of IFV ;)

We also showed concept work for the CSAT CAS airplane and a new AAF IFV- part of the additions scheduled for the other two episodes.

Edited November 7, 2013 by Papanowel

[chortles 263]

Haha, interesting... and not a MBT, so ProGamer still needed to "check fire". I haven't seen any screenshots or photographs of screenshots of this IFV though?

[progamer 14]

Haha, interesting... and not a MBT, so ProGamer still needed to "check fire". I haven't seen any screenshots or photographs of screenshots of this IFV though?

The AAF are still the exact same technilogically as NATO and AFF basically. And have better vehicles in some cases like the strider. Makes no sense.

And that new AAF jet is likely going to be perfectly balanced with the AAF jet even though it's from a super power and the AAF jet is from a small government militery with little money.

---------- Post added at 02:46 ---------- Previous post was at 02:45 ----------

I doubt any high tech military would still be using Su-34s or Harriers, which scratches off CSAT and NATO. In base arma 2, before Eagle Wing, there was no Apache, just the AH-1Z and Mi-24 variants for a gunship as far as I'm aware, which is parallel to our current situation with a Commanche and the Kajman.

I would enjoy more old weapons, considering modern insurgents will still use No. 4 Lee Enfields, but frankly I don't see that coming for a while. Development time is also worth noting, as has been said on this forum before. On the bright side though, more content is supposed to come with the other 2 campaign episodes, possibly including that CSAT CAS concept.

The variety in Arma 2 didn't feel forced and unrealistic like Arma 3 does.

[Tacti-Cool 10]

How are M4, M16 and M249 "obvious stuff"? The whole point of the 2030 era setting was to get more freedom regarding weaponry and setting.

MORE freedom, thats why there are 4 variants of 1 rifle for BLUFOR and 3 of the same for OPFOR. Yeah thats more freedom alright

[-Coulum- 35]

The AAF are still the exact same technilogically as NATO and AFF basically. And have better vehicles in some cases like the strider. Makes no sense.

And that new AAF jet is likely going to be perfectly balanced with the AAF jet even though it's from a super power and the AAF jet is from a small government militery with little money.

Maybe CSAT is helping to supply their military?

The variety in Arma 2 didn't feel forced and unrealistic like Arma 3 does.

True that.

I am actually really looking forward to dlc's in arma 3 for some reason. Arma 2 I could have cared less, but arma 3 I am going to be buying the dlc no doubt about it. I think its because the idea of "futuristic and original-ish" weapons intrigues me more than weapons that have already been created several times over by the community. That being said I can't wait for the MLODs to be released and for a semi-official Arma 2 content port. Cause I still like trying to recreate current events.

MORE freedom, thats why there are 4 variants of 1 rifle for BLUFOR and 3 of the same for OPFOR. Yeah thats more freedom alright

Well yes right now it may not seem like much but when they start making dlc i am sure you will see "the freedom"

[progamer 14]

Maybe CSAT is helping to supply their military?

True that.

I am actually really looking forward to dlc's in arma 3 for some reason. Arma 2 I could have cared less, but arma 3 I am going to be buying the dlc no doubt about it. I think its because the idea of "futuristic and original-ish" weapons intrigues me more than weapons that have already been created several times over by the community. That being said I can't wait for the MLODs to be released and for a semi-official Arma 2 content port. Cause I still like trying to recreate current events.

Well yes right now it may not seem like much but when they start making dlc i am sure you will see "the freedom"

Arma 2 felt like the DLCs were icing on the cake and a way to help out BI toward more games like Arma 2 or content. But Arma 3 just doesn't have that feel.

[defk0n_NL 2]

Like I said at the launch. The waiting has just only started. The true potential we can see half years after the release or later. This is still a beta IMO.

Keep telling yourself that, Some of these people have waited 12years.

[Fanatic72 181]

I doubt any high tech military would still be using Su-34s or Harriers, which scratches off CSAT and NATO. In base arma 2, before Eagle Wing, there was no Apache, just the AH-1Z and Mi-24 variants for a gunship as far as I'm aware, which is parallel to our current situation with a Commanche and the Kajman.

That is not true. :) There was Mi-24 and also Ka-52, both of them in more than one variant as well as two jets (Su-25, Su-34). Then yes, we had only AH-1Z on the USMC side but instead of two gunships there were three jets (F-35, Harrier, A10) and three transport helos (Venom, Knighthawk and Osprey) and C130, so addition of AH-64 wasnt even necessary compared to A3 which lacks completely in some aspects (jets).

I love the game and mods that are coming out are making me incredibly happy as they allow me to see how the game will develop into what we have now in A2, but still somewhere deep inside of me there is an opinion, that going for unrealistic future setting (without even trying to fulfill its potential with some hi-tech stuff) was a bad move and that upgrading the content we have now in A2 (with some additions ofc) would be much more succesful. Lets hope the modders will save arma.

[chortles 263]

going for unrealistic future setting (without even trying to fulfill its potential with some hi-tech stuff)

I still haven't forgiven everyone who hated on the railgun tank.

[Kerc Kasha 102]

I still haven't forgiven everyone who hated on the railgun tank.

Or the whining about the HUDs for the Iranians.

[chortles 263]

Or the whining about the HUDs for the Iranians.

If you mean the double goggles... those aesthetically attracted me to the OPFOR helmets.

But yeah, the TL;DR is that we have at least three vehicles confirmed in the development pipeline, both a jet for CSAT and an IFV for AAF, no clue on the third one, as far as assets go, and of course the two remaining episodes for SP content (missions-wise)... beyond that, who knows, because "NO PROMISES". As for the 2013 setting, that's already been answered before -- they'll eventually release the Arma 2 MLODs instead of doing any official port.

[JTF 10]

How are M4, M16 and M249 "obvious stuff"? The whole point of the 2030 era setting was to get more freedom regarding weaponry and setting.

AKs at least have been around for a long time and being all over the world, a favorite of hobbyist, armies, and rebels/terrorist it will continue to be around in the forseen future. To at to that the ak-12 is the "futuristicish" version we should at least have that.

Bohemia PLEAAASSEEE im begging!

[dm 9]

im getting bored of using MX after MX after MX, and again

Because playing with m4/m16 after m4/m16 after m4/m16 or ak after ak after ak is any different...

[eymerich 11]

But who will decide what content is missing ?

just compare the units in arma2 vanilla: in my opinion that would be a very good start for Arma3

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

How are M4, M16 and M249 "obvious stuff"? The whole point of the 2030 era setting was to get more freedom regarding weaponry and setting.

2035, sir.

---------- Post added at 21:14 ---------- Previous post was at 21:06 ----------

Personally, if BI is to add any more rifles, they better be in the some what 2035 era. Example, AK-12, ACR, Masada, AK-5C, AUG-A3, Modern FN-FAL, bring back the M-110 for sure, and some other modern rifles. (Note, the Masada and AK-12 should be able to switch between 7.62 and 5.56 as intended in real life)

[xendance 3]

just compare the units in arma2 vanilla: in my opinion that would be a very good start for Arma3

That doesn't answer his question at all.

[Harry Canyon 10]

Keep telling yourself that, Some of these people have waited 12years.

Yeah, I'm one of those, and I am through waiting.

[Joeh 1]

Because playing with m4/m16 after m4/m16 after m4/m16 or ak after ak after ak is any different...

i dont think you get my point, my point is that i want to be able to try lets say 10 different variants of guns, MX, AK, M4, M16, Katiba, ect ect ect and decide which one i like so i can use it, not just be stuck with MX or katiba... again ive read comments of people saying things like i doubt any futuristic military would use harriers or SU-34, true to some extent... for example the harrier, yes, a high tech military will probably no longer use it, but it dosent make it a bad jet?, its a fantastic aircraft and lower tech military's will use it, again bringing back to my point, there should be a faction that uses slightly lower tech gear, ie, harriers, older armoured vehicles, AK's, the whole world of military dosent revolve around just Russian and American modern gear... theres hundreds of things that would fit in and make the game more fun due to more variety, and also, i dont understand why people have this idea anyway, why does the fact that the AK being old make it bad?, or the M16, or even things like the SU-34, there are hundreds of examples of weapons and vehicles that are decades old, but they do their job well, so there still in service, for example the A10 Thunderbolt, one of the best ground attack aircraft if not the best, was brought into service in 1977, does that automatically mean that it wont be in service in 2035?, no because if the aircraft does its job well, then it wont be put out of service, if anything, they can just upgrade it with newer technology, its the same story with the AK-47, which was first produced in 1949, the Russians were considering making the AK-12 their standard issue rifle in 2012, yet again more evidence that just because the game is in the future, dosent mean that guns like the Kalashnikov's wont still be used, if a design works, they will keep it, and there hundreds upon hundreds of weapons and vehicles around today, that will probably still be in use in 2035

in fact i just found this on the wikipedia page for the A10 "Aircraft used primarily in this role are designated OA-10. With a variety of upgrades and wing replacements, the A-10's service life has been extended to 2040." this is a prime example of my point, in 2040 the A10 will have been in service for 63 years... there should be a version in the game

Edited November 8, 2013 by Joeh

[dmarkwick 261]

It seems to me that ArmA3 content is for ArmA3 game, if you wish for other content, like in ArmA2, then I'd suggest ArmA2 is your game. ArmA3 is just a different scenario.

[metalcraze 290]

Well yes right now it may not seem like much but when they start making dlc i am sure you will see "the freedom"

The freedom of asking money for a content missing from the game.

[-Coulum- 35]

Haha well yes. But, call me a sucker/sheep/fanboi whatever, but I am quite happy to give BIS money at this point. Once the Campaign is finished I believe we will have a fair amount of content with a solid base game that the devs are obviously dedicated to making better. And if their addons are released with the same amount of polish as arma 3 I would have no problem throwing money at them.

I mean you can't expect them to give us everything for free right? Compared to COD or BF arma 3 is well worth the money (IMO).

[chortles 263]

Haha well yes. But, call me a sucker/sheep/fanboi whatever, but I am quite happy to give BIS money at this point.

And this is probably what BI's number crunchers and Maruk realized long ago. ;)