Marksmen DLC: Concerns regarding suppressors

[doc. caliban 34]

EDIT: Great! I've been shown the error in my information. My concerns are abated.

Original post:

The topic of this post is the inclusion of suppressors for the two larger sniper rifles in the base game.

This is not a place to discuss whether or not they should be in the game: it's known that large caliber suppressors will be part of the DLC, and the topic has been beaten to death here. (A frustrating thread, but a good source of facts, and clarifications of common misconceptions.)

The purpose of this post is to call attention to the possibility that the DLC may be forcing us to pay for a feature that should be included in the base game for which we've already paid.

Each weapon in the base game that can have a suppressor attached has one included as an option. Each of them except the .50 and .408 rifles, despite the fact that they exist and are effectively deployed IRL. (Again, all covered here.)

The DLC includes such suppressors, showing that BIS correctly recognizes that they belong in the game.

Then why are they not already provided for the large caliber sniper rifles in the base game?

Please, don't let the DLC become an intentional lever to force us to spend money on this obvious, missing feature.

Let's let BIS know that, while we may love and appreciate the Marksmen DLC, we don't appreciate having to pay additional money for basic functionality that has been intentionally left out of the product that we've already bought. Not everyone can justify spending the money on the DLC. Not everyone will be interested in the additional content of the DLC. However, everyone deserves to have the complete, basic functionality and features that they've already paid for.

The two missing suppressors should be added to the base game via a free patch because they are just that; missing. They are not a DLC feature.

Best,

-Doc

Edited April 5, 2015 by Doc. Caliban

[Jona33 51]

Where have you got the idea you're doing to have to pay for the suppressors, you're not getting suppressors for the M320 or the GM6 last time I checked at all. They just don't exist in game. They're not withholding them as part of some grand plot, they're not making them in the first place.

[doc. caliban 34]

Then please lend your support to the request that they be added to the game. All arguments against have been addressed.

I'd heard in a few places that there would be suppressed, large-caliber rifles in the DLC. IF there are, then the effect is the same: you have to pay to get the functionality via a DLC weapon when the base-game weapons should already have it.

IOW, yes, I could be wrong ... we won't know for sure until it's out, but if such items are included for similarly chambered DLC weapons, then they should be added to the base game for free. (they should be there anyway, regardless)

Thanks for the reply!

-Doc

[John Kozak 14]

One big manipulation.

Let's let BIS know that, while we may love and appreciate the Marksmen DLC, we don't appreciate having to pay additional money for basic functionality that has been intentionally left out of the product that we've already bought.

Proof?

However, everyone deserves to have the complete, basic functionality and features that they've already paid for.

Please state what functionality you initially received with the game is now unavailable? It's been more than a year from the release - you've long got what you paid for.

I understand that something new and shiny came out and you want it; but the fact that you want it for free doesn't mean that it's a "intentionally omitted feature".

You really sound like Russian propaganda to me.

Edited April 5, 2015 by DarkWanderer

[slatts 1978]

The only thing you are paying for in the new DLC is the new weapons. The rest, which would include these suppressors if they were to be added, is free.

Regardless of weather they should be in are not, fact is you aren't paying for them if they exist.

Case closed. :)

[Degman 73]

You are paying for the weapons only (as the supporter of the Bohemia Interactive Studio), while platform update (bipods, weapon resting, AI behaviour, etc) will be free to everyone.

[fareast 20]

I'd heard in a few places that there would be suppressed, large-caliber rifles in the DLC

that would be the Kir with its integrated suppresor

[Greenfist 1863]

that would be the Kir with its integrated suppresor

Also Cyrus 9.3mm, Mar .338, Navid 9.3mm, and SPMG .338 all have suppressors.

One could argue that a 9.3mm MMG alone is also "a basic functionality that should've been in the game from the start and for free", just like the heavy lift helicopter from the Heli DLC, but that would sound stupid to me.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Greenfist

[goldenfiver 11]

You have no case... just check the dev branch.

No new suppressor can be mounted on any of the vanilla weapons.

The fact that bis chose not to include suppressors for those weapons is one thing- blaming them for forcing you to buy the dlc?.... nope.

Edited April 5, 2015 by goldenfiver

[Jona33 51]

You have no case... just check the dev branch.

No new suppressor can be mounted on any of the vanilla weapon.

The fact that bis chose not to include suppressors for those weapons is one thing- blaming them for forcing you to buy the dlc?.... nope.

Just to clarify, that's because the new suppressors are for different calibres, e.g. the Mk-1 EMR is 7.62mm uses the vanilla suppressor.

Also none of the new suppressors are premium content anyway, if you had a modded weapon set up correctly you could use them restriction free (I think, switched back from devbranch few days ago to use RHS).

[doc. caliban 34]

In response to the reasonable and on-topic replies, thanks! I am happy to be wrong about this! I'm after accuracy and fairness; not one-upmanship, contrarianism, and defending old information. :-)

This is cool … sort of. From a realism standpoint it’s disappointing that there are not suppressed “heavy†caliber rifles in the DLC, but it’s good to be shown that my concern is misplaced.

Yes, they were omitted from the vanilla game. The feature is available for the other applicable weapons and not for the larger rifles. That's a PM decision. It's not that suppressors weren't programmatically created and implemented in the vanilla code, then later added in a DLC. When a functioning feature is left out of applicable and logical sections of a product, it's considered to be an omission. (years of experience in the software industry)

So let's work on getting the missing functionality added to the base game. The code is there and utilized appropriately for everything except those two rifles.

Thanks again for the useful replies,

-Doc

[goldenfiver 11]

Just to clarify, that's because the new suppressors are for different calibres, e.g. the Mk-1 EMR is 7.62mm uses the vanilla suppressor.

Also none of the new suppressors are premium content anyway, if you had a modded weapon set up correctly you could use them restriction free (I think, switched back from devbranch few days ago to use RHS).

True, but the m200 still cant be equipped with the .408 one (added in the dlc).

I know its not realistic (maybe its BI's decision to keep it like that), and that a fitting suppressor should be included - but it has nothing to do with the dlc, and you are not forced to buy it.

[Brisse 78]

I believe they (suppressors for M320 and GM6) were left out for gameplay and realism purposes, and I pretty much agree with the developers decision.

1. Firing a sniper rifle in the game should be risky (easily giving your position away). This is a way to keep these rifles from being overpowered.

2. Suppressors for such rifles are uncommon in real life, although I do admit there are a few models available. Not sure if there are any in active service though.

3. Mounting a suppressor changes the point of impact (not simulated in game) which means the weapon sight has to be zeroed every time the suppressor is mounted/dismounted. This makes suppressors useless for anything except CQB, where the difference is negligible. The though of mounting or dismounting a suppressor on a sniper rifle in the field is not very practical. You won't be able to hit what you are shooting at. If you zero a sniper rifle with a suppressor on, then that suppressor will have to stay on the weapon during the whole mission. If you zero it without suppressor, then you will have to complete the entire mission without suppressor. These are some practical problems that Hollywood or the gaming industry does not portray to you, but because of the authentic nature of Arma, I think we are better off just not having suppressors for these two rifles.

[chortles 263]

For perspective, note that .408 CheyTac is 10.4 x 77 mm...

[doc. caliban 34]

I believe they (suppressors for M320 and GM6) were left out for gameplay and realism purposes, and I pretty much agree with the developers decision.

1. Firing a sniper rifle in the game should be risky (easily giving your position away). This is a way to keep these rifles from being overpowered.

2. Suppressors for such rifles are uncommon in real life, although I do admit there are a few models available. Not sure if there are any in active service though.

3. Mounting a suppressor changes the point of impact (not simulated in game) which means the weapon sight has to be zeroed every time the suppressor is mounted/dismounted. This makes suppressors useless for anything except CQB, where the difference is negligible. The though of mounting or dismounting a suppressor on a sniper rifle in the field is not very practical. You won't be able to hit what you are shooting at. If you zero a sniper rifle with a suppressor on, then that suppressor will have to stay on the weapon during the whole mission. If you zero it without suppressor, then you will have to complete the entire mission without suppressor. These are some practical problems that Hollywood or the gaming industry does not portray to you, but because of the authentic nature of Arma, I think we are better off just not having suppressors for these two rifles.

I've been through a lot of these threads over the years. :-) First have a look at my comments in this thread. Again, it's a frustrating read because it seems like a never-ending presentation of facts countered by misinformation and opinions, then representing the facts just to have it start over again, but it clears up a lot of the misconceptions. My last comment there lists multiple models from just a few minutes using Google. There are many manufacturers and models, and any force that can procure them has them and uses them when appropriate. High quality models have been around for .50 for at least a decade.

Not sure if I'd responded to the POI factor in there, so I'll touch on it here: The change is consistent and therefore predictable, so zeroing doesn't include any randomness. In most cases the difference can simply be compensated for by a shooter familiar with the system without bothering to re-zero.

I know that people always sound like pretentious wankers when they explain how it is that they know what they know, but for what it's worth: I worked as a law enforcement sales rep for a while, demonstrating and selling Class III weapons to LE departments. I've done tons of research, hands-on testing and demos, and interfaced with multiple manufacturers. Every misconception under the sun was fielded by us time and time again because it's not just us gamers who have picked up bad info from games and movies over the years. I even had a cop tell me that he thought the suppressor made the bullet spin in the other direction, and that that somehow reduced the noise. :j: I've had the good fortune to interact with many SO Marksmen who have significant practical experience in the field. In a way, I feel that the info is even more solid than coming from a single person with more hands-on experience than I have because I've gotten to obtain info from experienced people from all across the spectrum of these things, from design engineers and factory sales reps, to experienced LE marksmen with significant military experience with the technology.

As for why they should be in the game, I can sum that up right here:

They exist in real life, in quantity and variety, and have since decades before the timeline of Arma 3.

Specifically in response to your first point, limiting common hardware options in Arma 3 for "game play" reasons is what makes it just that much more of a game and less of a simulation. Fairness is a concept invented by human beings. The universe doesn't believe in it. Arma 3 is about realism, in so much as they are able to do so; Let other "games" do stupid "balancing" bull**** like reducing the power of suppressed weapons, etc.

For more details, do have a look at that other thread if you're interested. (I think it's all interesting, if not arduous to communicate. It's like some of those people don't want to learn anything.)

Let me know if I can answer anything not addressed in the other thread. I love talking about this stuff and sharing my knowledge!

Best,

-Doc

---------- Post added at 02:26 ---------- Previous post was at 02:10 ----------

True, but the m200 still cant be equipped with the .408 one (added in the dlc).

I know its not realistic (maybe its BI's decision to keep it like that), and that a fitting suppressor should be included - but it has nothing to do with the dlc, and you are not forced to buy it.

Already aknowleged; yes.

BTW, what is premium content? I noticed that the bipod (talk about common and plentiful crap) shows as being "premium" when I select it. Other than it only going on weapons that BIS decides can use it, what is premium about it, and what does that mean in the game?

I hope it doesn't mean that it's somehow rare or special! "Thermal imaging / NV scope? No problem! Bipod? Oooooo ... special!" :-)

-Doc

[brightcandle 114]

The real balancing aspects of suppressors aren't yet modelled in the game, but if they were it would of benefit but less so in the marksman DLC. The main balancing aspects is that catching all those hot gases makes them hot. With rapid fire the suppressor will eventually reach a point where it warps and a round will hit it destroying the suppressor and potentially being quite dangerous to the operator and those around them. There is simply a limited amount of rounds you can fire. Even after a relatively moderate number of rounds they get hot enough that removing them is an issue, they are simply too hot to unscrew. Worse than that the constant heating and cooling of lower rates of fire can losen the suppresor. Most of these don't matter to the sniper and DMR rifles where we would expect the rate of fire to be very low, but its certainly an issue on carbines. it would be nice I think to have this modelled as the balancing aspect.

[doc. caliban 34]

The real balancing aspects of suppressors aren't yet modelled in the game, but if they were it would of benefit but less so in the marksman DLC. The main balancing aspects is that catching all those hot gases makes them hot. With rapid fire the suppressor will eventually reach a point where it warps and a round will hit it destroying the suppressor and potentially being quite dangerous to the operator and those around them. There is simply a limited amount of rounds you can fire. Even after a relatively moderate number of rounds they get hot enough that removing them is an issue, they are simply too hot to unscrew. Worse than that the constant heating and cooling of lower rates of fire can losen the suppresor. Most of these don't matter to the sniper and DMR rifles where we would expect the rate of fire to be very low, but its certainly an issue on carbines. it would be nice I think to have this modelled as the balancing aspect.

I don't think that any modern suppressors, let alone any made in the Arma 3 timeframe, suffer from this kind of problem unless they are inferior in design and materials to start with, and/or improperly used.

From a tactical standpoint, who cares how hot they get? How hot do you think a barrel gets under sustained fire? The fore end of an assault rifle is typically a ventilated hand guard for this very reason. Again, these are highly situational, subjective, and narrowly-defined arguments.

How about suppressing 200-rounds of 7.62x51mm fired thought an LMG (HK-21) in a continuous burst? Impossible? How about SEVEN 200-round belts in 15 minutes? This was done as a torture rest of a particular brand of suppressor. Result: A wicked-hot suppressor and weapon, no reduction in accuracy, and no reduction in sound suppression effectiveness. Did I mention that this demonstration was done over 10 years ago? (Imagine what the capabilities are like now, or will be in the near future of Arma 3!)

We reproduced a truncated version of this test (400 rounds) with an FN MAG and a different (high end) brand and design suppressor. Result: A wicked-hot suppressor and weapon, no reduction in accuracy, and less than a 15% increase in sound, though that was contested because someone else's sound metering setup detected no increase. (It was a casual demonstration.)

Again, large caliber suppressors exist, are commonly available, have been for years, are completely effective, and offer the same advantages as any other caliber, taking into account scaling of the device given the same design. Not having them in Arma 3 because "it wouldn't be fair" is a subjective argument that could be made against everything else in the game, and is, IMO, an insult to the entire point of Arma and where it sits in the spectrum of realism in FPS titles. My understanding is that it's supposed to be the undisputed realism champ in relation to all of the rest ... such a product should have no tolerance for subjective manipulation of features in the name of game play.

Sucks to be under fire from a real, suppressed weapon system at 1,300m and not be able to tell where the hell the shooter is? Yep. Realism can certainly suck! Bring it, I say!

Best,

-Doc

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

I doubt it's balancing, on the note of the GM6 Lynx, if you look at it's muzzle break, it doesn't appear to have that kind of "on the field" attaching of a suppressor. As for the Intervention... That's anyone's best guess.

As it's been stated, sure, Arma 3 feels empty without the DLC's and what not, and some people just don't want to pay for it, it's been discussed over and over again how it's "unfair", and how it "should've" been in game. But your complaining about the wrong this to be honest. The Heli/Marksman DLC add 110% new stuff that wasn't promised to be in the full released game. None of the pictures of the F-35 were meant to be in game either, figures why there's no F-35, huh. Also, your title is a tad misleading, and contradicts the precise explanation we got from Dev's, stating that "Content is Paid, Features are Free". It's a platform Update, everyone gets it. The new guns are basically a "Thank You" for supporting BIS's continuous developing of this great game.

[doc. caliban 34]

I doubt it's balancing, on the note of the GM6 Lynx, if you look at it's muzzle break, it doesn't appear to have that kind of "on the field" attaching of a suppressor. As for the Intervention... That's anyone's best guess.

As it's been stated, sure, Arma 3 feels empty without the DLC's and what not, and some people just don't want to pay for it, it's been discussed over and over again how it's "unfair", and how it "should've" been in game. But your complaining about the wrong this to be honest. The Heli/Marksman DLC add 110% new stuff that wasn't promised to be in the full released game. None of the pictures of the F-35 were meant to be in game either, figures why there's no F-35, huh. Also, your title is a tad misleading, and contradicts the precise explanation we got from Dev's, stating that "Content is Paid, Features are Free". It's a platform Update, everyone gets it. The new guns are basically a "Thank You" for supporting BIS's continuous developing of this great game.

A thoughtful reply, thank you.

I added a disclaimer to the top of the original post explaining for any newcomers that I was mistaken, so that's all good. Nothing in my recent replies has been about the DLC, just my support for the idea of making the vanilla game "whole" when it comes to the suppressors. I think that's a significantly different thing from the F-35 example in both situation and complexity.

At this point, my only complaint is that the suppressors for those two weapons were inexplicably left out of the vanilla game, and I would like them to be added at some point as part of a regular patch.

Best,

-Doc

p.s. In regards to longevity and reliability, I know of a suppressor manufacturer that guarantees their devices for 30,000 rounds, and who has not had a single device failure in over 20 years. (And they are a primary supplier of suppressors to the US Military, so we're talking high volume and lots of use.) There's nothing fragile about a well designed and built suppressor!

[roberthammer 582]

Well in alpha it could be because of balance but now which every DLC weapon including MGs got own suppressor? nah, at least M320 (M200 Cheytac) would deserve his special suppressor which

not sure about GM6 Lynx tho , maybe it has threaded barrel who knows?

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

A thoughtful reply, thank you.

I added a disclaimer to the top of the original post explaining for any newcomers that I was mistaken, so that's all good. Nothing in my recent replies has been about the DLC, just my support for the idea of making the vanilla game "whole" when it comes to the suppressors. I think that's a significantly different thing from the F-35 example in both situation and complexity.

At this point, my only complaint is that the suppressors for those two weapons were inexplicably left out of the vanilla game, and I would like them to be added at some point as part of a regular patch.

Best,

-Doc

p.s. In regards to longevity and reliability, I know of a suppressor manufacturer that guarantees their devices for 30,000 rounds, and who has not had a single device failure in over 20 years. (And they are a primary supplier of suppressors to the US Military, so we're talking high volume and lots of use.) There's nothing fragile about a well designed and built suppressor!

Hmmm, in regards to supressors being non-DLC in this case, the only way we could see that is if they add non-DLC weps, with the same caliber. No one would be against this of course, but BIS probably isn't going to be on board for that.

Edit: I hate the mobile version of the forums.

Edited April 6, 2015 by DarkSideSixOfficial

[L3TUC3 32]

Hmmm, in regards to supressors being non-DLC in this case, the only way we could see that is if they add non-DLC weps, with the same caliber. No one would be against this of course, but BIS probably isn't going to be on board for that.

Edit: I hate the mobile version of the forums.

Or just not mark the suppressor as premium. Without a useable gun they're pointless anyway.

Honestly, just mod them in yourself if you feel your life is incomplete without them. I don't think it's a huge issue.

[doc. caliban 34]

Or just not mark the suppressor as premium. Without a useable gun they're pointless anyway.

Honestly, just mod them in yourself if you feel your life is incomplete without them. I don't think it's a huge issue.

Ah, no; the suppressors themselves are not that big of a deal; I use the Mk18 almost exclusively. For me personally, it's always been about why they aren't there, and advocating for their inclusion based on realism.

In 30 years of FPS gaming it's always annoyed me when suppressed weapons are penalized with fictitious limitations in games (less power usually being the case) in the name of "balancing". While understandable with the popularity of PvP style gaming and the level of "it's not fair!" whininess of enough of the players, PM's feel that they have to neuter what some players perceive as an unfair, super-weapon when they find themselves on the wrong end of it. With Arma, I hoped that wouldn't happen and that players would simply be subjected to the real-wolrd unpleasantness of being in such a situation.

The seemingly inevitable issue I've seen in brining this up for any game is the instant deluge of opposing feedback fueled entirely by a mix of misinformation about the technology and the aforementioned opining of how unfair suppressors are.

The former isn't a big deal as it's fact-based as opposed to opinion-based, and I can shine a lot of light on that issue. Most folks are interested in it and are happy to learn more about it. The latter are the folks I take more issue with, though I temper my opinion with the awareness of the fact that those people are a big part of the product's customer base and that their opinions count too.

This difference for me here is that it's Arma, and this is likely the best chance I'm ever going to have at seeing a title that values realism over the artificial, toning down of reality in the name of coddling players that have grown accustomed to the unrealistic treatment of suppressed weapons in most of the game-centric titles over the years.

Circling back around a bit, the reason for my original rant when I got this thread off on the wrong foot, is that there is a mod in the Issue Tracker that keeps stating that the issue is resolved in the DLC. Since the ticket is about the suppressors being omitted in the vanilla game, he/she is basically saying that the functionality is being added for a fee as part of the DLC. They are likely forgetting the point of the ticket and thinking of it as just being about not having suppressed, heavy-caliber weapons, in which case the statements might seem correct in their mind. Again though, that is not what the ticket is, so the DLC is not resolving the issue, regardless. My mistake was taking the mod's word as authoritative, and not thinking that they were misconstruing the topic of the ticket. As it stands now, my understanding is that the DLC won't address the issue, which is good because that would not be the correct way to do so.

So, that leaves me to continue being a whiny-ass-bitch because, damn it; those suppressors should be included in the vanilla game! The simple fact that they exist and are common should soundly trump the fact that some people will be butt-hurt over the painful reality of their inclusion. :-)

As for premium content, what is that exactly? I mentioned before that I noticed the bipod is marked as such, but I can't imagine what would make such a basic and ridiculously common attachment "premium". I worry that it's more non-reality based "balancing" or something else along those lines. I haven't noticed any difference in gameplay though, so I haven't been too worried about it.

Thanks for the replies, all.

-Doc

Edited April 7, 2015 by Doc. Caliban

[Jona33 51]

Premium content simply refers to what is part of the DLC, and subject to restrictions. For this DLC the weapons, the two new sights (AMS and Kahilia), the new full length ghillies, the new remote designators and the marksmen showcase (and probably more but I can't remember it) are premium. Bipods are not premium, they work for everyone.

Edited April 7, 2015 by Jona33

[doc. caliban 34]

Premium content simply refers to what is part of the DLC, and subject to restrictions. For this DLC the weapons, the two new sights (AMS and Kahilia), the new full length ghillies, the new remote designators and the marksmen showcase (and probably more but I can't remember it) are premium. Bipods are not premium, they work for everyone.

That makes sense.

I wonder why my bipod says premium when I mouse over it. The text color changes to yellow/gold as well.

Muahahaha! I have a special bipod that no one else has! :-)

Thanks for the info,

-Doc