We need worse weapon systems

[the_demongod 31]

Grab yourself the RH packs, the HLC packs, CAF Aggressors, and a couple of other little packs and you're good to go. I would like to see some more realistic contemporary launchers but otherwise, the options already exist, you just have to find them.

I don't want more weapons. I want the weapons we have to require more skill than pressing 'T' and firing in any direction.

Well, it might hit the target. The missiles still try and level out and perform a direct attack, so if the vehicle is behind a chest high sandbag, the missile will probably hit that instead.

I mean, at the very least we should be able to select between direct- and top-attack modes, right?

That is true, but if the target is near enough to you, you can hit it from the opposite side.

For example, say you're in a town, next to a building. On the other side of the building, there is an enemy tank. We'll say you pressed T to acquire it earlier, so there is a little marker showing exactly where the tank is.

If you fire in the opposite direction, the missile will fly a loop over the house and land on top of the tank.

There is a video of this around somewhere, I'm just having trouble finding it.

[zhaoyun707 10]

Not to hijack this thread but they need to fix the RCO and MRCO.

The MRCO has the same exact zoom of the 10x of the RCO.

[the_demongod 31]

Not to hijack this thread but they need to fix the RCO and MRCO.

The MRCO has the same exact zoom of the 10x of the RCO.

I don't see how that has anything to do with the topic of this thread. There are all sorts of threads about that sort of stuff, and we have a feedback tracker. use it. don't bring us your completely irrelevant problems.

[DancZer 65]

I must agree that some game elements are too easy to use. I think difficulty of use these things should be based on the actual game difficulty settings. With lower difficulty the game should be more arcade.

Artillery:

Lower difficulty the current system(find target, call support). On veteran difficulty player should send the grid(find target, read direction and distance=>find grid(,height above see level?), send).

Lock system:

On the lower difficulty the current system.

On the Veteran difficulty the player should change the weapon settings to be able to lock the target(im not a weapon specialist, but i think it is need some configuration before use). Example for Titan see the targeting UI for hint.

+1 for this, this should be default on all settings.

This issue is also related to waypoints - in real life, there is no floating arrow with an automatic distance. You look at your HUD or your GPS, which has a range and directional arrow. Much more interesting.

[the_demongod 31]

I must agree that some game elements are too easy to use. I think difficulty of use these things should be based on the actual game difficulty settings. With lower difficulty the game should be more arcade.

Artillery:

Lower difficulty the current system(find target, call support). On veteran difficulty player should send the grid(find target, read direction and distance=>find grid(,height above see level?), send).

Lock system:

On the lower difficulty the current system.

On the Veteran difficulty the player should change the weapon settings to be able to lock the target(im not a weapon specialist, but i think it is need some configuration before use). Example for Titan see the targeting UI for hint.

+1 for this, this should be default on all settings.

Yeah, it's the little things like the waypoints that can make a game seem much more real/interesting. You have to work for it, it doesn't all get handed to you on a silver platter.

Personally, I wouldn't mind if there was a setting where all artillery computing is disabled, and you had to use a trajectory equation for it. Here is a video explaining how to do it. It would be easy, all you need is a basic graphing calculator, or a mobile app or something.

[roshnak 41]

Requiring a graphing calculator to use artillery is a bad idea. That is the epitome of adding micro-maagement instead of skill. For the vast majority of players it would be a boring hassle. In my opinion, that's exactly the kind of thing that is best left to mods.

[the_demongod 31]

As I said, it would be a completely optional setting. All it would do is lock the artillery computer. It is a super easy thing to implement.

Now of course you could always say "why don't you just not use the computer personally?" and I think that's a great answer, and also a reason against it.

Come to think about it, it can probably be done with a simple script.

Remember, it's all brainstorming. It was just a thought.

[beastcat 14]

Well, you can always use the "enableEngineArtillery" command in order to disable artillery computers and then work with range tables. Hur hur self advertising

Sadly the self-propelled artillery behaves really weird and someone has to find a proper equation for that.

[silentghoust 132]

All of these complaints are the same thing that Arma 2 deals with on a daily basis as well. It is up to the communities that play to decide how challenging they want their experience to be.

Don't want artillery computers? Disable them and calculate them out by hand.

Don't want way points? Create missions that only give you grid coordinates. Hell a lot of groups won't even have task shown.

Don't want easy lock ons? play with the AT-rocket launchers.

Don't want night vision? clear that out, use flares, and chem lights.

This is why the game is considered Sandbox, you can make things either as easy or hard as you want.

[the_demongod 31]

That is not the point of this thread. It's not just about not getting something, it's about making advanced/guided weapons a more interesting/dynamic experience than just tab locking and shooting in whatever direction you please.

I realize the topic of the thread deviated after all that artillery computer crap, but that's not the point.

[silentghoust 132]

That is not the point of this thread. It's not just about not getting something, it's about making advanced/guided weapons a more interesting/dynamic experience than just tab locking and shooting in whatever direction you please.

I realize the topic of the thread deviated after all that artillery computer crap, but that's not the point.

Again another thing the community is more then capable of fixing, there just clearly isn't enough demand for it. I personally have never been able to simply lock on do a 180 and fire the missile. The lock breaks after I lose FOV.

[the_demongod 31]

Again another thing the community is more then capable of fixing, there just clearly isn't enough demand for it. I personally have never been able to simply lock on do a 180 and fire the missile. The lock breaks after I lose FOV.

Exactly. As it turns out, you don't need a valid lock to fire the Titan.

As long as there is a white box around your target, you can fire in any direction and the missile will seek and usually hit the target. Try it now: Go into the editor, place an Ifrit, place yourself (AT Specialist), lock the ifrit, turn away, aim up, and fire. The missile hits the Ifrit anyways (as long as it is far enough away).

[SamG123 10]

I totally agree, it would be very cool to have old weapon systems, it would be a great variety. Like DayZ there is old and modern (well sort of).

[the_demongod 31]

I totally agree, it would be very cool to have old weapon systems, it would be a great variety. Like DayZ there is old and modern (well sort of).

But once again, that is not at all the point. Like I've said, the title is only an eye-catcher.

I want high tech, futuristic technology. What I want is for these high tech weapon systems to be more realistic in function (aka harder to use). For example, the Javelin is currently the most combat proven and effective Anti-armor weapon currently in use today.

However, if you actually read the OP you would know that, from the video, its User Interface is anything but user friendly. It is designed to have many functions and options, and as a result it is a very complex piece of hardware.

What I want is for more of these functions to be in the game. And although we can't have the game become FGM-148 Javelin Simulator 2015, at least some degree of accuracy in terms of functionality must be taken into account. For instance, instead of tab locking and firing and basically guaranteeing a hit, the targeting process should more closely emulate reality. This would essentially include features such as Top/Dir attack, or maybe forcing the player to keep the target directly inside the crosshairs while a box is automatically created around the target before the missile can be fired. This would do a few things: require the player to know a little about the weapon before using it, require more skill (to keep the crosshairs on target, etc), and make it overall more realistic functionality-wise.

And we're talking about Arma 3, so don't bring up DayZ. It's about as relevant as me bringing up how Command & Conquer has aircraft, because so does Arma.

[Aeriyn 10]

Mostly agreed, although just a little while ago I managed to dodge about four or so missiles from a static AT launcher that the other team swore they got locked on to me while in a zamak. I was driving a kilometer out at full speed perpendicular to them, so I guess maybe the missile had at least some limit to its turning radius?

[the_demongod 31]

That is very interesting. I haven't tested the Static AT launcher, but I know for a fact that the missile travels far faster (at least twice) than the MPRL. Perhaps this fast speed (realistically) limited turning radius? I'll have to test that out.

Thanks for the info!

[doveman 7]

I agree with this but think that BIS should implement it as DLC, so that they don't alienate any of the casual players who provide much needed funds to them but those of us who want more realistic systems can purchase the DLC and then play on servers where the DLC is required. Much like the Helicopter DLC, where you can choose not to have it and fly the old, unrealistic helicopters or buy it and use it to fly using a realistic flight model.

[the_demongod 31]

Exactly, it'd be something that would have to be implemented down the line. And yes much like the RotorLib flight model it would be a simple option in the game menu, and mission scripting could forced players to use it.

[DancZer 65]

I agree with this but think that BIS should implement it as DLC, so that they don't alienate any of the casual players who provide much needed funds to them but those of us who want more realistic systems can purchase the DLC and then play on servers where the DLC is required. Much like the Helicopter DLC, where you can choose not to have it and fly the old, unrealistic helicopters or buy it and use it to fly using a realistic flight model.

I think you don't understand the Arma 3 DLC strategy! Features are free, content is payable. New flight model and firing from vehicle are features. Helicopters are contents. After DLC release you could fly Arma 3 vanilla helicopters with realistic flight model, but you can't use the new helicopters like the CH-67 Huron. If you want to fly with new helicopters, you should buy the DLC.

[Night 1]

Agreed. The gunners in the Hunters and Ifrits probably shouldn't be sitting in the back hidden away. And locking onto things with Titan's is way too easy.

[the_demongod 31]

I don't have such a problem with the Hunter/Ifrit/Strider RCWS actually. They are fair (even easy) game for a typical squad AT Rifleman, a large group of infantry weapons, or even a skilled marksman.

The agree launchers are too easy though. At least require the player to hold his aim on the target to get a solid lock before firing, it's just too easy to kill things (especially with the Titan and its magic 360 degree kill capability).

[twisted 128]

Right now in arma3 I'm safer out of a armored vehicle than inside one. It's so bad that I always disembark before going into combat. Problem is the way to easy lock on launchers.

Great thread.