Jump to content
Katie Byrne

Burnes Armories Tanks and Deployment Vehicles

Recommended Posts

Something similiar was done in ACE2, if you look in to config files, there were aded values for hull/turret fire, explosion etc.

This is what I really loved with ACE the immersion when a tank was hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I suspect that in ArmA3 the whole system migh be even better considering Olds RAM system might be capable to completely override hitpoints system. Truth to be told, it might be even possible to create something similiar like Steel Beasts Pro PE vehicle armor system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BI have made Tank interiors before. They just stopped including them. There was also a Feature Request but BI haven't done anything.

Yup I loved to be inside the tanks in OFP.

BTW a damage system like Iron Front instead of a total hitpoints could be cool too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's no such thing as best tank, rifle, aircraft... only amateurs discuss about weapons with such absolutes. ;)

And believe me, you would not want to sit inside these two if armor is perforated and ammo is hit, they would blow up just like T-72.

I know what you're trying to say but I'm not saying this because I think so, but because various tests have proven those 2 tanks are better then other tanks when you look at all items.

Like rate of fire, armor, speed. Although they are both expensive.

About blowing up, you'll have to penetrate them first and good luck with that! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know what you're trying to say but I'm not saying this because I think so, but because various tests have proven those 2 tanks are better then other tanks when you look at all items.

Like rate of fire, armor, speed. Although they are both expensive.

About blowing up, you'll have to penetrate them first and good luck with that! ;)

No, they did not proven to be better in tests than other tanks. I think you don't have even smalles idea about their design. Sorry to say that but this is truth.

Leopard 2 fairly won only in one country, Sweden where tests with different vehicles were done, and won only because from economic point of view, Germans made better offer. While in Greece, manufacturer, KMW, bribed Greece officials, there was a lot of fuss about this some time ago.

Leopard 2 also have thinner and somewhat weaker armor protection than most other modern MBT's. Same applies to K2.

So believe me, it is easy to perforate their armor, if you know what to do and where to aim. I know, as I seen weak spots in Leo2 armor for example... there is plenty of photos of these.

You want to see them or discuss? PM me, so we won't do OT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Cough*Challenger II*Cough* :D.

Ok, I'm really sorry but I just had to. Excellent work on the tanks though, looking forward to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

another demonstration video

In this video you can see an engagement from the commanders seat and also from the drivers seat. Its a fairly casual affair but gives an idea of how this thing handles.

regarding the armor setup. for realisms sake and to actually give a tactical benefit to keeping front toward enemy the hitpoint layout is heavily biased toward to the rear and rear sides. this means you can take a fair amount of damage to the front but can very easily be knocked out with hits to the rear or to the rear sides behind the ERA.

by the way, being British myself, the Chally is already underway :p

Edited by Burnes15th

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
regarding the armor setup. for realisms sake and to actually give a tactical benefit to keeping front toward enemy the hitpoint layout is heavily biased toward to the rear and rear sides. this means you can take a fair amount of damage to the front but can very easily be knocked out with hits to the rear or to the rear sides behind the ERA.

Which is realistic, very realistic. However I heard some interesting things abour M19 ERA installed on M1's, however hard to confirm them, but I heard that due to multilayered design (yeah, inside a module there is actually several ERA layers), it is capable to handle hits even from tandem warheads, but as I said, hard to confirm, yet in theory possible.

ERA protecting hull and turret sides in newest up armor package for Challenger 2 seems to share similiar design.

by the way, being British myself, the Chally is already underway

Good luck, especially that due to a lot of secrecy around Challenger 2 interior, there is very little photos of it, and these that are avaiable, mostly shows only loader station.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi, You're doing a great job, it looks very good. But the 2 best tanks in the world at this moment are the Leoaprd 2A7 MBT & K2 Black Panther, just saying. ;)

ah opinions..

---------- Post added at 18:06 ---------- Previous post was at 18:05 ----------

Good luck, especially that due to a lot of secrecy around Challenger 2 interior, there is very little photos of it, and these that are avaiable, mostly shows only loader station.

Yeah it was a challenge (see what i did there :p) but i've managed to piece enough reference photos together to get a realistic view of the interior to work from :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah it was a challenge (see what i did there ) but i've managed to piece enough reference photos together to get a realistic view of the interior to work from

;)

BTW I have a question, do You plan to eventually make external models of M1's more realistic? Or perhaps wait for realistic RHS ones, and then eventually perhaps, some cooperation to spread idea of tank interiors with other mods?

Yeah I am a realism nut, and BIS models are... well, they are as they are.

But as far as current status of your work is, it looks great, and... refreshing? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

probably not with the M1's at least as the Bohemia exterior models are more or less fit for purpose in my eyes and there is already so much modelling to be done on other vehicles. I do plan on adding more choice in proxy items though to give a bit of individuality and 'deployed' look that vehicle commanders can choose from

EDIT - I do plan on 'dirtying up' the desert textures a bit though as a friend of mine in one of our weapons platoons pointed out that they look to 'clean' and as with the stowage items etc i'm going for a used/deployed look

---------- Post added at 18:48 ---------- Previous post was at 18:43 ----------

This looks absolutely fantastic! I would like to ask, especially since you're "in talks with other mod makers about providing the interior lods for their mods too" and because the Abrams models are BI's besides said interior LODs, would you be willing to participate in the Community Upgrade Project?

I had a look at that page and tbh i cant understand the point of it or what the benefit is. its a pretty vague idea/concept in my eyes and i probably would not be interested in participating with my current understanding of what it is..

Edited by Burnes15th

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a look at that page and tbh i cant understand the point of it or what the benefit is. its a pretty vague idea/concept in my eyes and i probably would not be interested in participating with my current understanding of what it is..

The point is to not have 17 semi identical arma2 abrams tanks out there in difficult to locate pbos simply as one of 17 options of identicalness in using a2 in a3.

Ditto ak47's, 10 squillion buildings, aircraft, cars and so on.

If you want *the* arma2 two M1A1, it's in cup. (suitably improved to suit a3, but not modified to have 3 turrets and 22 machine guns)

There's no benefit to you, going alone with that specific definition, because the sheer scale of usage of cup means a user will look first in cup for a tank simply because he has cup, than search the internet for a maybe.

This has nothing to do with you creating a m1a1 tank with tangerine spots and 5 turrets based on the arma2 mlod model. That is not part of cup. It has everything to do with you basing your 5 turret tank inheriting from a cup class & model proved to work in a3 without issues.

So, to that end, you might as well be the person to supply the base abrams tank in the first instance.

Apart from the sheer joy of creating a model in the first instance, the chances of your model ever being used or 'popular' are very slim, no matter how good it is, unless you have 'audience share' from a large project.

nothing changes in your ability to use your own ofpec_tags for your classes and models if you don't want it to, simply the need to bring it into cup\address\space as an umbrella

Edited by Mikero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The point is to not have 17 semi identical arma2 abrams tanks out there in difficult to locate pbos simply as one of 17 options of identicalness in using a2 in a3.

Ditto ak47's, 10 squillion buildings, aircraft, cars and so on.

If you want *the* arma2 two M1A1, it's in cup. (suitably improved to suit a3, but not modified to have 3 turrets and 22 machine guns)

There's no benefit to you, going alone with that specific definition, because the sheer scale of usage of cup means a user will look first in cup for a tank simply because he has cup, than search the internet for a maybe.

This has nothing to do with you creating a m1a1 tank with tangerine spots and 5 turrets based on the arma2 mlod model. That is not part of cup. It has everything to do with you basing your 5 turret tank inheriting from a cup class & model proved to work in a3 without issues.

So, to that end, you might as well be the person to supply the base abrams tank in the first instance.

Apart from the sheer joy of creating a model in the first instance, the chances of your model ever being used or 'popular' are very slim, no matter how good it is, unless you have 'audience share' from a large project.

nothing changes in your ability to use your own ofpec_tags for your classes and models if you don't want it to, simply the need to bring it into cup\address\space as an umbrella

Thank you for clarification

My own position is that as stated i did not intend this for release publically but have recieved so many emails and youtube messages about releasing it that i would feel like kind of a dick if i don't now. But no im still not interested in joining the CUP I'm sorry. I have an audience in the 15th MEU and at the end of the day that is the only audience i really care about

I really dont want to get into a whole thing about this. There are other Abrams mods available like the excellent Port by Raid. I'm trying to do something very specific with this for the sake of immersion

---------- Post added at 07:30 ---------- Previous post was at 07:28 ----------

Can i ask you why did you make pip at hatch's windows?

for realism. I'm basically working toward the same kind of functionality you get in steel beasts. Well, as close as you can get in the arma engine i guess. remember in real life those are periscopes not windows.

Edited by Burnes15th

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not even the beginnings of a problem burnes. The only bottom line that counts is to enjoy your modding, for any reason and purpose. Cup is a Kju initiative that has merit, and as you kindly pointed out, i clarified what it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as long as i look this image,

http://data4.primeportal.net/tanks/jeff_derosa/m1a2_details/images/m1a2_details_052_of_125.jpg

it's looks like transparent material, rather then some computer monitors or electronic device. the thing i discuss about this because, why aren't you set those tiny preiscope as transparent material?

IDK maybe i'm not American tank crew member so i don't really know those preiscopes are actually some kind of digital electronic device or hard glass.

The reason i ask about this is those PIP looks (Only the preiscope) too slow to watch what is going and happening at outside of the tank

anyway i'm really appreciate your great effort and work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are just periscopes, it is armored glass in the outside + two prisms.

periscope2yx8.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, as long as i look this image,

http://data4.primeportal.net/tanks/jeff_derosa/m1a2_details/images/m1a2_details_052_of_125.jpg

it's looks like transparent material, rather then some computer monitors or electronic device. the thing i discuss about this because, why aren't you set those tiny preiscope as transparent material?

IDK maybe i'm not American tank crew member so i don't really know those preiscopes are actually some kind of digital electronic device or hard glass.

The reason i ask about this is those PIP looks (Only the preiscope) too slow to watch what is going and happening at outside of the tank

anyway i'm really appreciate your great effort and work.

yes i had entertained the idea of having straight viewports (due to pip latency as you describe) but there is another reason I cannot, which is that for usepip to work (i.e keeping a character looking at the monitor) the interiors have to be set up so that the screen is always oriented in the same direction as the hull.

the 'illusion' of the turret rotating is maintained by every pip render source rotating with the turret but nothing in the interior actually moves with the turret. If i had direct viewports this would be incredibly apparant.

I may however add a variant that forgoes usepip functionality in favor of direct viewports for the commander (and therefore having the turret interior lod rotate with turret) so you guys can choose which you prefer to use :)

---------- Post added at 09:50 ---------- Previous post was at 09:48 ----------

These are just periscopes, it is armored glass in the outside + two prisms.

http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/805/periscope2yx8.jpg

thank you for this excellent technical illustration of how the commanders vision blocks work :)

If you look in the picture posted by kgino1045 you can also see that the interior (bright blue) viewport is much lower than the exterior windows which in that image are clearly backed by solid metal

Edited by Burnes15th

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
because the sheer scale of usage of cup

no to rain on your parade or anything, but until today I've never even heard of CUP, and I check these forums daily. maybe you're overestimating the popularity of this CUP just a tad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no to rain on your parade or anything, but until today I've never even heard of CUP, and I check these forums daily. maybe you're overestimating the popularity of this CUP just a tad

I would really like to not go down this road in this thread. I see the merits of the CUP for people who play on a lot of servers etc wanting Arma 2 gear and content but I am someone who doesn't use PwS, play on public servers ( i play exclusively with the 15th MEU and pretty much exclusively as a tank commander) and gets every mod i need/want from armaholic. After reading Mikero's detailed explanation of the CUP (and that's all it was, clarification, which i did ask for) I understand the merits of it but I don't think its the appropriate avenue for what I'm doing here.

I don't want a falling out with the guys who do CUP (like the Alduric thing) I just want to make the mods I'm making and that's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks really excellent mate. Look forward to trying it out and thanks for sharing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another milestone in the modding community for ArmA III. Outstanding addon!

If you need help with textures, I may know a guy or two you can talk to. :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×