ACE3 - A collaborative merger between AGM, CSE, and ACE

[gibonez 18]

Also I think ACE 3 should focuse only on today vehicles and armaments, and let the futuristics stuff to bohemia.

I hate the future setting as much as any other person but I think that might be impossible since ACE 3 atleast initially will probably not be a content mod so they would have to work with they are given in the vanilla game.

Only way I can see ACE3 being focused on modern day realistic vehicles is only if they partner with mod teams like RHS, BW mod etc and incorporate their assets directly into ace and then completely ignore the vanilla arma 3 assets.

[luckylegs 19]

Now i haven't seen anything yet about this so will the artillery system be as hard as it was in arma 2 that would be great?

If you use the Search Thread function at the top right above the posts, you'll find a lot of people asking/talking about the mortars and artillery system. This post should answer your question:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?190433-ACE3-A-collaborative-merger-between-AGM-CSE-and-ACE&p=2913897&highlight=artillery#post2913897

Off-topic: God, that video was difficult to watch for me, purely because RHS still haven't configured their inertia values. I have no idea how people can stand to actually properly play with RHS in its current early state without writing their own weapon configs.

Edited April 7, 2015 by LuckyLegs

[nerdwing 13]

That stabilized optics suite on the Blackfoot <3

[WadeP 10]

boris;2914527']Yup. Already' date=' more than he had in AСE2. And the development continues.[/quote']

I don't think you understood him, he meant that addon that you showed is ACE2 ported into Arma 3. Which it isn't, but whatever. I still like ACE2 mortars than the ones you showed.

Edited April 7, 2015 by wadethegreatest

[sqb-sma 66]

As it stands now - no. I'm still working on ACSE, but don't think we can pull off a joint release. What I could (hopefully) do is to include impacts, explosions and other projectile related stuff as "ACE SM 2.5" if there is need for it... :o

Oh boy oh boy oh boy.

So good to know your mod isn't dead, even those videos from late 2013 showed the best audio for gunshots I've ever heard in Arma. How are things going? Did you take a break from development?

[james2464 177]

As it stands now - no. I'm still working on ACSE, but don't think we can pull off a joint release. What I could (hopefully) do is to include impacts, explosions and other projectile related stuff as "ACE SM 2.5" if there is need for it... :o

Yes please!

[gibonez 18]

Cant wait for that airburst.

Edited April 7, 2015 by gibonez

[Linkage 10]

I'm gonna ask again about ragdoll and ACE. Have you managed to use ragdoll instead of unconscious animation?

It would be awesome, i've just noticed that it's made in TacBF mod, look how people are getting revived after being ragdolled:

If you watch the ACE3 Trailer you'll notice at 0:13 there's an unconscious soldier being treated who is ragdolled.

[mazza 1]

Looking forward to ACE3 :) Thanks !!

[stuffedsheep 10]

If you watch the ACE3 Trailer you'll notice at 0:13 there's an unconscious soldier being treated who is ragdolled.

Not necessarily, Both AGM and CSE allow interaction with corpses to confirm they are dead. Presumably this is also the case with ACE3 medical system. So it's more likely than not, that the CSAT soldier is dead and can still be interacted with.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Hopefully so - not being able to drag dead bodies around was always a downer in ACE2. There are times where the corpses of friend and foe are all you have for cover. :(

[da12thMonkey 1943]

The 119 is fine as a model still, I just need good models of the sight units. I want to make them similar to how I did the M2A2 Aiming Circle that is in ACE2.

Don't 119s have a digital gun-laying/fire-control system now, based upon M777A2's DFCS?

[toadball 35]

Depends on which variant you mean, the M119A2 doesn't but the M119A3 (first deliveries in 2013) has an INS and FCS that does have commonality with that used by US M777s, notably not the same components as that used on Canadian M777's and British light guns in so far as they lack the APS iirc.

The A3 would probably require substantial model changes to the A2/A1 that ACE2 used, which still requires the sight unit modeling that Nou has already mentioned.

As cool as I would find the A3 upgrades (especially if a L118 with LINAPS made an appearance), always found the M119A2 to be a far more enjoyable bit of kit to crew than the M109 in ArmA.

Considerably more involved than pressing a few dialog display boxes, and getting a gun crew or gun line working quickly and efficiently in ArmA has been a source of great satisfaction for myself and a good few others I know.

Very much looking forward to seeing ACE develop and like most others can't wait to get my grubby mits on it.

[hg2012trigger 13]

We need more trailers xD Show us more about ace3 :)

[Shockley 3]

Sent PM, please respond promptly.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Depends on which variant you mean, the M119A2 doesn't but the M119A3 (first deliveries in 2013) has an INS and FCS that does have commonality with that used by US M777s, notably not the same components as that used on Canadian M777's and British light guns in so far as they lack the APS iirc.

The A3 would probably require substantial model changes to the A2/A1 that ACE2 used, which still requires the sight unit modeling that Nou has already mentioned.

Aye, I meant the A3. I figured most of the Army would have fielded it by now following a span of 2 years since it went through main gate (probably not National Guard etc. though), but I may be wrong.

With the UK's LINAPS, the APS (Artillery Pointing System) data came from the INU mounted above the barrel, and the American system appears to do the same:

As you say though, it's not the Selex system used by Canada and the UK (and NZ, UAE, Thailand and a few other places).

Even with a LINAPS-type system though, pointing is still fairly involved compared to something like M109 - there's no automated gun-laying system and the firing solution is still computed externally by the detachment commander before being relayed (digitally IIRC) to the GLU for the gun crew to lay in the solution.

The only thing LINAPS really cuts out is the need to use external devices to survey the battery position and figure out the exact grid, altitude and slant of the guns since the INS makes that information immediately available for both the gun crew and the commander, and it removes the need to set up aiming posts for relative azimuth (which is what the Aiming circle was used with) since the gun's current elevation and deflection is also displayed directly on the GLU. You just move the gun directly until values on the GLU match the ones computed by the commander; but it's hardly a point-and-click affair like the current BIS arty computer, and does still require coordination of the gun crew.

[mikey240 11]

I have been thinking would a good artillery system for opfor or independent, be type-63 or rak-12 mlrs ?

[jaynus 10]

FYI Everyone,

Nou is only one person - and we have 10+ guys on our team. His inbox has repeatedly been flooded to max messages (300) and he is not a full-time PR person, he just posted the thread. Please wait to direct the volume of requests for when we have released our github page to the public so the issue tracker can be utilized. Nou will not be responding to the PMs flooding in.

Again, please just sit tight, and realize Nou is getting 50+ PM's a day, so he most likely will not be answering.

Thanks,

ACE Team

[Przemro 18]

How about improved damage system for vehicles, I mean here tanks mostly. So you can hit tank engine/fuel and set whole tank on fire, all about armor systems like ERA etc. will this be included, I know some of this was in ACE for A2, but much change from that time.

[Zriel 12]

I believe Arma 3 already has this. At least, i can blow up blufor tank with a good shoot at rear exhaust port. If hitting any other part of the rear, It may take 3 or more hits

[jumpinghubert 49]

FYI Everyone,

Nou is only one person - and we have 10+ guys on our team. His inbox has repeatedly been flooded to max messages (300) and he is not a full-time PR person, he just posted the thread. Please wait to direct the volume of requests for when we have released our github page to the public so the issue tracker can be utilized. Nou will not be responding to the PMs flooding in.

Again, please just sit tight, and realize Nou is getting 50+ PM's a day, so he most likely will not be answering.

Thanks,

ACE Team

1+

Too much spam here. Give the team the time to make a mod, not to answer 20 generic questions the second.

[DaViSFiT 21]

http://i.imgur.com/7QBC7QXl.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/OBJ6nHel.jpg

Cant wait for that airburst.

BwMod already have Airburst, but a bit too low damage radius.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

BwMod already have Airburst, but a bit too low damage radius.

Isn't that some kind of masking air burst smoke and not designed to... kill anyone?

[gibonez 18]

The TF47 carl gustav also has a built in airburst mode its quite nice but its effectiveness is reduced due to there being no shrapnel. I can envision ACE fixing that.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Isn't that some kind of masking air burst smoke and not designed to... kill anyone?

Yes, that's what the pictures he was quoting show - obscuration smoke

Edited April 7, 2015 by da12thMonkey