i swear arma 3 was supposed to have a railgun tank???

[Tyl3r99 41]

ooops what have i started :P

i just wanted confirmation i wasnt just remembering false information, but yeah.. maybe if the ammo cfg is there someone can simply... well make one :P

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

There is someone making the MK. V. SC or something like that. It's kinda like the watercat, it's the boat off of Battlefield 4, the name dodges me at the moment. But what I would love to see is something like that, that people can walk on while it's moving. A medium boat, obviously not too big,at be roughly the size of a Teansport truck, but it's just a medium patrol boat. Runway loss work great which are shown in some workings of various modders who make sea craft. But there's simply not enough Vanilla boats, visibly. It kinda sucks that you can't really experience Naval assets on a more decent scale. Imagine standing on the side of a patrol boat as it cruises smoothly, looking for problems on the coastlines, spot one. Report it to an Armed patrol boat who has the weapons and means to deal with such threats. It's really not there without mods, therefore leaving people who don't use mods out of the experience. Anyhow, I've probably went far deeper into the subject, that's a topic for a whole new thread.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Exactly. It's completely logical, that is, unless they've completely deleted the model by now... but they could make a new one if they wanted to. Also note the pictures, and note how they still appear like Arma 2.5 (Take On Helicopter Engine). Anyhow, i hope for some important content additions, like Naval assets and such. Something to change up the game, because literally NO ONE uses water in this game.

I am the author of at least two such missions that feature water as methods of insertion or completing objectives. The naval aspects introduced so far are fantastic and while there's always room for improvement adds a great new element to mission making. Don't make such generic assumptions.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

I am the author of at least two such missions that feature water as methods of insertion or completing objectives. The naval aspects introduced so far are fantastic and while there's always room for improvement adds a great new element to mission making. Don't make such generic assumptions.

Well, i admit i use water as often as i possibly can, even though that may be slim at best. But it should be used more than it currently is. There are a ton of docks on altis, all with only boats that barley fit the size of some of them. And for a country in the literal middle of the ocean, you'd think the AAF would have something to patrol it with, ya know? Just my two sense.

[kremator 1065]

Haven't you already downloaded 'Railgun DLC' ?

[Valken 622]

It would great to have all the future warrior stuff back into the game. Arma Purist CAN disable it on the server and in missions for classic game play while others can enable it. By not having it is a let down for other half.

I hope the Rail Gun is made available again. It would an awesome Ghost Recon type scenario to procure it or take it out.

[haleks 8212]

I bet the only purpose for that tank was to kick some alien ass.

But, since they've been replaced by CSAT, I really don't see what use we could make of a railgun - what kind of target in the current game could justify the deployement of such a weapon?

[Tyl3r99 41]

csat with their helmets look like alien flys

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

I bet the only purpose for that tank was to kick some alien ass.

But, since they've been replaced by CSAT, I really don't see what use we could make of a railgun - what kind of target in the current game could justify the deployement of such a weapon?

True, which is pointless because aliens, if they have the capability to fly between planets, well... Lets just say that i'm certain they could decimate earth with the blink of an eye if they wanted. Not hard, with the tech they'd have. Second, the only application i could guess for a Railgun tank would be to VASTLY overpower any other enemy asset from massive distances. Don't forget that Railguns have an unprecedented range of effectiveness. Currently, if it was put in game, it would be something that everyone would prepare to deal with beforehand, because if you can destroy it or disable it and take it before the enemy has a chance to use it, well... yeah.

[Jona33 51]

In fairness, a static or towed railgun would be absolutely awesome, without becoming completely overpowered, especially if it was fairly sizeable. That way you'd have a genuine threat (i.e. it massacres just about everything) without it becoming everyone has railguns and everything is a one shot kill.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

In fairness, a static or towed railgun would be absolutely awesome, without becoming completely overpowered, especially if it was fairly sizeable. That way you'd have a genuine threat (i.e. it massacres just about everything) without it becoming everyone has railguns and everything is a one shot kill.

You know what? That, is an awesome ass idea. Imagine like the D-30 in Arma 2, except, it's actually a Rail gun, and it's like a tow able Arty system, and looks futuristic like the Turret of a Nemo Mortor System. It's range is massive, and because it's a Rail-gun, it can hit targets up to 10 times faster than any Arty system. Only downside is if it's to shoot long distances faster, it'd have to be smartly placed, as the trajectory to accomplish such a task would be block by mountains and large changes in terrain... Someone write this down and mail it to the BIS Office.

[the_demongod 31]

It's range is massive, and because it's a Rail-gun, it can hit targets up to 10 times faster than any Arty system.

There's one problem with this though.

The current 155mm howitzers already have a staggeringly long range. On the "Far" setting (the middle one), it is possible to shoot at any place on altis from the airfield.

On the "Further" setting, you can't shoot at any place on altis, because the minimum range is too large. And there is another "Extreme" level of range which has a minimum range so large that it doesn't even fit inside the furthest extents of the ocean on the map.

At this level, shooting at any place near the minimum range ring shows times of flight upwards of 160 seconds. I have no idea whether or not these ranges are realistic, but I don't think there is any need for a weapon that shoots 10 times further than this system.

The only way I see having realistic railguns used in the fashion you guys described (which is a great idea by the way), would be to have them mounted on large naval assets and have them only be mobile in the water. That way you could still use the artillery computer and indirect fire to wreak havoc very quickly from across the map, but would also have some direct-fire capabilities.

But it's almost a waste of resources adding them to the game if they are going to try to simulate them realistically; the railguns planned for the navy can fire a projectile which reaches the horizon in seven seconds.

Edited December 12, 2014 by the_Demongod

[lexx 1387]

I would totally buy a "future weapon system" dlc. The T-100 looks awesome.