The AAF Tank is freaking amazing!

[shifty_ginosaji 10]

Does anybody else think that the AAF is super powerful, their armoured units beat the living s**t! out of both NATO and CSAT, also their tanks look like some Maus reincarnation. Its also unfair that they are supposed to be totally decimated and they have the best:

- MRAPs (The strider is a freaking amphibious scout car)

- IFVs (Both the AFV Gorgon and the FV720 Mora are both IFV's that are smaller and better armed than their counterparts)

- Tanks (Not really in performance but they look amazing)

- Ships (They are equaled with NATO in the ship scene as they have both Minigun Speedboats and SDV's)

- Jets

- They have a platoon-rated cargo heli

The only thing that they are worse or equal in are gunships and infantry which seems to be a bit dodgy as less well-equipped armies usually have their infantry as their only effective force.

Does anybody think that NATO or CSAT are the best faction?

[Elena 2]

Actually i think (performance-wise) CSAT are the best ones. The Days were Blufor was always automatically the best Side are definitely over with A3. Reasons here:

- The CSAT Soldiers have this special Armoured Clothing stuff that gives them higher Amount of Bulletproof-Stuff (sounds wierd, but thats' how it works in the config) than any other Side. NATO can counter with Carrier Plate Rigs, but those only protect the Upper Body, not the Legs and Arms.

- The Mi-48 Helicopter can basically do anything, and is great in it. Transport a Squad up to 8 Soldiers, no big Deal. More powefull Cannon than the Commanche, he got it. 8 Long-Range Guided Air to Ground Missiles which can onehit pretty much any vehicle in the Game while the Commanche has only DAGR's which are lower ranged and less powerfull.

- The have the Same Amount of Vehicles (Atillery, AA-Units) than Blufor, but their MRAP, IFV and MBT is faster. Also, the MBT has a Coax and a Commander MG.

I don't really like CSAT that much. But in terms of equipment and Perfcormance, they beat out anything else. If you ask me whats' my favourite faction, that is definitely AAF. Thing is, they are lacking some stuff, such as Helicopter Gunships, Mobile AA and Atillery, also the Kuma MBT is (config-wise) underpowered. Based of the Leopard 2 it should have quite thick armour and due to the extended Plates and Active Armour, this should be eben better. Seems like some artificial balancing here. ALso, their Infantry uses the mk20 (5.65mm) while all other Forces have acces to the more Powerfull 6.5mm Caseless. Its' hard enough to kill a CSAT Soldier with the 6,5mm due to their increased Armour. Even harder for a AAF Soldier who is les protected and has less firepower. But still, rating from the assets they have, i like the AAF Most, but i wish they would get some more equipment. Not a MLRS, but maybe a Mobile Atillery Plattform (not a copy paste with the Kumas' Base and the same Turret NATO and CSAT have, please :\) and an Attack Helicopter. The Hellcat is more of an armed recon thingy to me.

[BadHabitz 235]

The Strider is also more lightly armored when compared to the Hunter and Ifrit. The armor value for the Strider is 90, where the Hunter/Ifrit is at 120. So having some amphibious properties has a detrimental effect to armor value.

[shifty_ginosaji 10]

the strider has an edge because of the commanders seat feature too, it can be used for lazing and it provides great situational awareness so a team of players can cover most of sectors of the vehicle.

---------- Post added at 08:33 ---------- Previous post was at 08:23 ----------

True, CSAT is the most powerful faction but only config-wise it doesn't seem to have tech like helmet-goggles HUD or a decent transport as the orca is more of an armed scout and its role is easily supplanted by the Kajman that has the same amount of seats, the only disadvantage that they have is their aircraft are amazingly easy to shoot down with AA missiles as they are large and not very manuverable.

I, as a gunship pilot primarily prefer the blackfoot as my attack gunship because it has a PIP that shows the gunners target for the pilot. It is a small advantange but in MP it helps Pilot-Gunner coordination and doing gun runs as you can target and manuver the gunship to the gunners maximum effect. The other thing I like about the AH-99 is that it is very manuverable and small so it is great for tree-level operations through enemy territory.

[Rovka 14]

I wonder, what is the actual strength of the AAF, NATO and CSAT presence lore-wise?

[best2nd 10]

I wonder' date=' what is the actual strength of the AAF, NATO and CSAT presence lore-wise?[/quote']

Both AAF and CSAT are brigade sized.

As for NATO I'm pretty sure TF Aegis survivors and CTRG are all that's left. If some of the older campaign material from Alpha holds true then we might be seeing 1st Heavy Brigade Combat Team as part of the 7th Infantry Division now styled as 7th Combat Technology Research Division. However, due to all the changes to the campaign chances of that still being true are slim.

[spanishsurfer 58]

I, as a gunship pilot primarily prefer the blackfoot as my attack gunship because it has a PIP that shows the gunners target for the pilot. It is a small advantange but in MP it helps Pilot-Gunner coordination and doing gun runs as you can target and manuver the gunship to the gunners maximum effect. The other thing I like about the AH-99 is that it is very manuverable and small so it is great for tree-level operations through enemy territory.

You forgot its #1 advantage: It comes with AA missiles when no other heli in the game does.

[progamer 14]

The AAF tank is the first tank that actually got the correct 7.62mm and 12.7mm weapons. Only they messed up because the gunner should have access to a 12.7mm and 7.62mm with a commander and loader with access to 7.62mm machine guns.

But all in all these tanks are a downgrade from Arma 2. They have the wrong calibers, lack addition loader weapons and lack commander weapons.

[runekn 3]

The strider's engine is in the back, meaning it can drive into trees head on without damaging the engine.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Does anybody else think that the AAF is super powerful, their armoured units beat the living s**t! out of both NATO and CSAT, also their tanks look like some Maus reincarnation. Its also unfair that they are supposed to be totally decimated and they have the best:

- MRAPs (The strider is a freaking amphibious scout car)

- IFVs (Both the AFV Gorgon and the FV720 Mora are both IFV's that are smaller and better armed than their counterparts)

- Tanks (Not really in performance but they look amazing)

- Ships (They are equaled with NATO in the ship scene as they have both Minigun Speedboats and SDV's)

- Jets

- They have a platoon-rated cargo heli

The only thing that they are worse or equal in are gunships and infantry which seems to be a bit dodgy as less well-equipped armies usually have their infantry as their only effective force.

Does anybody think that NATO or CSAT are the best faction?

This is by no means unfair. The Leopard 2 is the Best tank to date, so that's not surprising. Second, the AAF, personally, my Favorite, do have downsides, one being the Buzzard, which isn't going to fair well in Air to Air combat with equally skilled pilots, against say, Opfor's, or what Blufor's Air assets have to offer. Besides that, I still like the AAF a lot. CSAT, is my second pick.

[instagoat 133]

The Merkava and T-100 would need little overhauls, for equipment and visual representation.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/russia_russian_army_tank_heavy_armoured_vehicles_u/t-90ms_main_battle_tank_data_sheet_specifications_information_specifications_pictures.html

For T-100, improved sideskirts and front armor, as well as improved turret armor like on the T-90MS.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/44127607@N04/11577757894 Merkava MK4. Note the additional trophy radar on the rear of the turret. Also, a Samson RCWS on top of the turret or machinegun for commander would be cool.

The Kuma is really the only truly advanced tank. The other two are an early 2000s vehicle which is debated about being replaced, the other a 1990s design that actually culminated in a completely different design (T-90MS, which probably profited from the lessons learned when designing the Black Eagle's turret.)

[Guest Ti0n3r]

I like CSAT. Their small arms are defo the ones with the most punch far as gameplay go, + there's something about their camo theme. Im eager to see how bohemia will portray them in campaign ep 2 :cool:

[chortles 263]

This is by no means unfair. The Leopard 2 is the Best tank to date, so that's not surprising. Second, the AAF, personally, my Favorite, do have downsides, one being the Buzzard, which isn't going to fair well in Air to Air combat with equally skilled pilots, against say, Opfor's, or what Blufor's Air assets have to offer. Besides that, I still like the AAF a lot. CSAT, is my second pick.

I actually expect the BLUFOR and OPFOR jets to overtake the Buzzard in capability once they're released, it's just that until then the Buzzard is the only Arma 3 fixed-wing aircraft from BI; as it stands, the OPFOR jet already looks sleeker and possibly even better armed for air-to-air.

[Corvinus 35]

the other a 1990s design that actually culminated in a completely different design (T-90MS, which probably profited from the lessons learned when designing the Black Eagle's turret.)

Nope. T-90MS and Object 640 "Black Eagle" (not "T-95", how some people call it, which's wrong on several levels) are two completely unrelated designs.

[UltimateBawb 1]

Nope. T-90MS and Object 640 "Black Eagle" (not "T-95", how some people call it, which's wrong on several levels) are two completely unrelated designs.

He's saying that the Kuma was likely based off of the T-90MS but had turret design greatly influenced by the "Black Eagle."

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

I actually expect the BLUFOR and OPFOR jets to overtake the Buzzard in capability once they're released, it's just that until then the Buzzard is the only Arma 3 fixed-wing aircraft from BI; as it stands, the OPFOR jet already looks sleeker and possibly even better armed for air-to-air.

I'm not gonna lie. The beauty of this brought tears to my eyes. Also, yes, this is based off the Yak-130/131, which is a Fighter Trainer sooo... Buzzard = Dead. Though, then it comes down to pilots senses, over Factions Equipment, and this usually goes for all vehicles and equipment, even down to infirintry.

---------- Post added at 22:32 ---------- Previous post was at 22:28 ----------

On another note, Chortles, i REALLY hope they don't add the hex camo in it's standard color at least. I hope that goes along the lines of low visibility grey, or hell, keep it the way it is. XD

[shifty_ginosaji 10]

IMO it is unfair as the AAF are meant to be the weakest faction in terms of tech.

---------- Post added at 12:08 ---------- Previous post was at 12:05 ----------

Totally right, the only problem is that the A.I doesn't have any decent crews in the infinite tank park of RV4......

[Rovka 14]

If BIS loves to balance, then balance some more, and make all factions equal, each with their own weaponry and systems respectively, so that missionmakers can choose what to use, and what not.

[progamer 14]

If BIS loves to balance' date=' then balance some more, and make all factions equal, each with their own weaponry and systems respectively, so that missionmakers can choose what to use, and what not.[/quote']

The mission maker should decide the balance, not BI.

[[evo] dan 79]

The mission maker should decide the balance, not BI.

^This TBH. Its a lot more fun this way, and helps produce distinctive (and some would say memorable) assets which you then have to learn to counter.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

The mission maker should decide the balance, not BI.

This, yes. BI should not balance. BI should focus on more realism aspect (by this, i mean create vehicles that factions use, based upon their real life counterparts), and the server owner, or mission maker sorry, does the balancing.

[Corvinus 35]

He's saying that the Kuma was likely based off of the T-90MS but had turret design greatly influenced by the "Black Eagle."

Oh, may be I really did misunderstand InstaGoat's post, thinking it was about real life designs, not about BIS design decisions - if so, I apologize.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Oh, may be I really did misunderstand InstaGoat's post, thinking it was about real life designs, not about BIS design decisions - if so, I apologize.

Both wrong. The Kuma, is basically the Leopard 2, or based off of it.

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

Both wrong. The Kuma, is basically the Leopard 2, or based off of it.

http://www.vmir.su/uploads/posts/1386420156_6.jpg

Bawb misinterpreted InstaGoat's post. InstaGoat was saying that the Kuma is the only truly advanced tank, because it's rivals are an early 2000's vehicle (Merkava) that's being talked about being replaced, and the T-100, which is a 1990's design that was reworked and is a mashup of the T-90MS/Black Eagle. (I think that's what he was saying with the T-100. He certainly wasn't saying the Kuma is based off the T-90 or Black Eagle)

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Bawb misinterpreted InstaGoat's post. InstaGoat was saying that the Kuma is the only truly advanced tank, because it's rivals are an early 2000's vehicle (Merkava) that's being talked about being replaced, and the T-100, which is a 1990's design that was reworked and is a mashup of the T-90MS/Black Eagle. (I think that's what he was saying with the T-100. He certainly wasn't saying the Kuma is based off the T-90 or Black Eagle)

Ahhh, i see. Would love to see the terminator take place of the T-100 in that case. Though, the Merkava, is a very good and durable tank design, can't honestly see anything replacing it... Unless maybe the new Polish tank with Thermal Camo... Idk, it's hard to choose what to put in place of current tanks.