Kydoimos 916 Posted June 19, 2015 It is over 100 km2 of land mass [/Quote]Wow! Awesome! SO excited! :bounce3: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chairborne 2594 Posted June 19, 2015 Can't wait to get some more info on the factions involved and what the urban environment is going to look like. I think i saw some new apartment buildings, i wonder if there are also going to be things like new houses, markets, industrial buildings and such. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hellfire257 3 Posted June 19, 2015 Yeah, in-land water would be really good. ARMA has always felt weird with no rivers or streams. Flowing water was shown in a VBS video last year, and I'd love to see the same thing in A3. Source: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rich_R 1087 Posted June 19, 2015 Can't wait to get some more info on the factions involved and what the urban environment is going to look like.I think i saw some new apartment buildings, i wonder if there are also going to be things like new houses, markets, industrial buildings and such. Agreed, in my mind the expansion isn't necessarily about the island itself but all the assets it adds to the modding tool kit. As the environment looks so rich, this would certainly be the foliage and different buildings. These should spawn a myriad of maps from those that like to make them but may not have the modeling skills :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chortles 263 Posted June 19, 2015 (edited) @ Mustangdelta: If Bohemia got enough external artists as solicited, that should mean to be quite a bunch of new assets... :D Edited June 19, 2015 by Chortles Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freesets 11 Posted June 19, 2015 Yeah, in-land water would be really good. ARMA has always felt weird with no rivers or streams. Flowing water was shown in a VBS video last year, and I'd love to see the same thing in A3.Source: its like 1.5 years ago... and some people still say the engine(which is the same as a3) is obsolete...well it might look like that if you play a3 on a macbook air. one thing a3 engine lack(deliberate i think) is support for 100k+ poly models like vbs, but the industry will force them to remove the models poly limit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
froggyluv 2133 Posted June 19, 2015 And for the love of all things holy, place nodes for ALL windows and doors! Functionality over decor at all times keeps Jack a happy boy.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wiki 1558 Posted June 19, 2015 It is over 100 km2 of land mass ;) Would be great if we could have the map comparison as you did with Altis (Altis and different maps from other games) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vegeta897 13 Posted June 19, 2015 Since Tanoa is apparently an archipelago, closer comparison might be to put five Stratis (~20km2) islands in an archipelago and you'd also get the same landmass. God damn, when you put it that way, that sounds huge, even if it's less than Altis. I think the fact that it's arranged in islands makes it seem bigger than the one huge landmass of Altis. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chortles 263 Posted June 19, 2015 (edited) Yeah, in-land water would be really good. ARMA has always felt weird with no rivers or streams. Flowing water was shown in a VBS video last year, and I'd love to see the same thing in A3.Source: As of 24 February it wasn't happening, neither is underground, ponds are a maybe... and DnA equivocated on "multicore" before admitting that "Our new engine (not for Arma 3) will likely use more modern approaches and handle advanced hardware more efficiently."Well, yeah, lol.When you bring in APC's in an MRAP comparison, of course the Strider becomes obsolete. =P The Strider's the only one that can get ashore on its own, but as far as force structures go it has to go ashore on its own since the AAF lacks any helicopters capable of airlifting it, whereas NATO and Taru could bring their MRAPs to shore and around the island by air, albeit one at a time. Edited June 19, 2015 by Chortles Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
liquidpinky 11 Posted June 19, 2015 Really?!?!....well everyone is entitled to their opinions :p but I doubt the AAF will be represented in TANOA at all. So maybe the Strider is totally out of the scope of BIS? Currently the AAF actually have the best amphibious support and theoretically could be the only force of any use there. :P Bring back the BMP2 I say, there was nothing more fun than sitting turned in and switched off floating on a pond waiting on some unsuspecting smuck like a crocodile waiting for a buffalo. Also, bring back ponds I say. ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chairborne 2594 Posted June 19, 2015 Currently the AAF actually have the best amphibious support and theoretically could be the only force of any use there. :P Just because their MRAP floats in water and the others don't? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cadmium77 16 Posted June 19, 2015 (edited) Lots of little islands, lots of jungle, lots of mountains. Brilliant choices considering how bad Arma vehicles are at pathfinding and how often they get stuck or even wrecked colliding with even simple obstacles like buildings. So it'll be for special forces landing on zodiacs and helicopter missions and no big theaters for armor battles. :( And even infantry will be driven to short range firefights instead of ranges of 300yards and more. The antithesis of everything we're observing from videos from the middle east and the Ukraine conflicts. And so this will militate against organized units using tactics and will tend to make all encounters devolve into Counter Strike style macho run and gun idiocy. how wonderful Edited June 19, 2015 by Cadmium77 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wiki 1558 Posted June 19, 2015 Hey, why bother? Even if AAF is not present in Tanoa in the campaign or SP missions, you still have the possibility to add them in the editor when making your own missions. And I bet some people will make AAF retexture for Tanoa. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainAzimuth 714 Posted June 19, 2015 Currently the AAF actually have the best amphibious support and theoretically could be the only force of any use there. :PBring back the BMP2 I say, there was nothing more fun than sitting turned in and switched off floating on a pond waiting on some unsuspecting smuck like a crocodile waiting for a buffalo. Also, bring back ponds I say. ;) Prepare to do that more often. Because Tanoa is probably going to be a whole lotta that. Lol, i do that not in Stratis/Altis, cus no one looks out to sea, that is of course until they see 30MM rounds coming, by which time it's too late to react. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
alanford 27 Posted June 19, 2015 "0:55 rip fps in multiplayer" HAHAHAHAHHAHA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
das attorney 858 Posted June 19, 2015 And for the love of all things holy, place nodes for ALL windows and doors! Functionality over decor at all times keeps Jack a happy boy.. Yes! It's an easy win for mission makers/scripters and would be appreciated. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainAzimuth 714 Posted June 19, 2015 (edited) Can't wait to get some more info on the factions involved and what the urban environment is going to look like.I think i saw some new apartment buildings, i wonder if there are also going to be things like new houses, markets, industrial buildings and such. I hope for PLAN marines. Because I like their blue Adaptive Camo. http://newpacificinstitute.org/jsw/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/1314266781_79346.jpg (130 kB) Edited June 20, 2015 by DarkSideSixOfficial Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zukov 488 Posted June 19, 2015 "0:55 rip fps in multiplayer" HAHAHAHAHHAHA no problem for the devs the MP part doesn't exist hahahahhahahahahahahaha Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainAzimuth 714 Posted June 20, 2015 no problem for the devs the MP part doesn't exist hahahahhahahahahahahaha Considering they created a game mode centered around Kavala, which they themselves play test more often than most other play tests, i'd say that when they do play multiplayer, it's in the most demanding part of the terrain. Still, i honestly don't think it's going to be that bad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fn_Quiksilver 1636 Posted June 20, 2015 no problem for the devs the MP part doesn't exist hahahahhahahahahahahaha This is a good point. There are many community authors who know the importance of developing/testing code in MP, so the final product is tuned for MP. On the other hand, many authors build stuff in their proverbial secret dungeon, in the sterile VR editor, and only once they feel its 100% complete do they test it in MP, and then they encounter reality. As for Tanoa, from the vid it seems a nice tactic is being used. Most of the world area appears to be water, grass and trees. This means less simulated objects/houses/buildings per unit of area. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windies 11 Posted June 20, 2015 This is a good point.There are many community authors who know the importance of developing/testing code in MP, so the final product is tuned for MP. On the other hand, many authors build stuff in their proverbial secret dungeon, in the sterile VR editor, and only once they feel its 100% complete do they test it in MP, and then they encounter reality. As for Tanoa, from the vid it seems a nice tactic is being used. Most of the world area appears to be water, grass and trees. This means less simulated objects/houses/buildings per unit of area. The problem with MP isn't really to do with object count but more to do with increased simulation which basically adds to frame time therefor making rendering slower. Actually I don't think any of the performance issue's currently present within ArmA really have much to do with the rendering aspect, unless you increase resolution or AA or settings until it DOES become a factor, rather it has much more to do with how much simulation is going on and therefor increasing frame time. I actually tend to think that the issue's with Altis and it's size stem from the data streaming that BI uses to constantly stream data into and out of the process work space, not so much object count or view distance. If you think about it, if the process is waiting for data to be streamed into the work space, that's cause for a stalled thread right there. It's probably why draw calls aren't much the issue but the actual size of the island is the issue. Also why it would seem older content runs better, because it's smaller data sizes being streamed. How that plays into Tanoa and performance I think will depend more on it's detail and data size rather than raw object count or anything render related. It's one of the reasons why I've always been a proponent of 64 bit binaries. I think it would be one alleviation of a problem, but only if they truly do away with the actual streaming and map completely to RAM, something which would probably require work on the engine which I think they are reluctant to do. It would probably increase the minimum RAM requirement to 8-12gb+ but if that's what's needed for a stable platform then so be it. RAM is honestly pretty cheap anymore. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chortles 263 Posted June 20, 2015 God damn, when you put it that way, that sounds huge, even if it's less than Altis. I think the fact that it's arranged in islands makes it seem bigger than the one huge landmass of Altis.For comparison, a flat 100 is ~37% of 270, so round up to 40% (percentage of Altian land mass) and we'd be looking at ~108 km2, though we have yet to get an actual island count for Tanoa...Currently the AAF actually have the best amphibious support and theoretically could be the only force of any use there. :P Just because their MRAP floats in water and the others don't? Someone shares my skepticism... all three base game military factions would be of use in Tanoa simply for having even one wheeled amphibious APC per faction, each of whose capabilities are a qualitative advantage over the ability of a MRAP to go ashore, and to reiterate what I previously said, the fact that the Mohawk only has the slingloading threshold of a Ghost Hawk means that the Striders would have to go ashore while the Hunter can be put ashore by a Huron and the Ifrit by a Taru. (I'm discounting quantity because that's up to the mission maker.)And even infantry will be driven to short range firefights instead of ranges of 300yards and more. The antithesis of everything we're observing from videos from the middle east and the Ukraine conflicts.You mean the very theaters/terrain types which Bohemia was specifically trying to avoid when deciding the Expansion terrain? I wouldn't find it plausible for them to have not seen the infantry gameplay difference coming. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
das attorney 858 Posted June 20, 2015 The problem with MP isn't really to do with object count but more to do with increased simulation which basically adds to frame time therefor making rendering slower. Actually I don't think any of the performance issue's currently present within ArmA really have much to do with the rendering aspect, unless you increase resolution or AA or settings until it DOES become a factor, rather it has much more to do with how much simulation is going on and therefor increasing frame time.I actually tend to think that the issue's with Altis and it's size stem from the data streaming that BI uses to constantly stream data into and out of the process work space, not so much object count or view distance. If you think about it, if the process is waiting for data to be streamed into the work space, that's cause for a stalled thread right there. It's probably why draw calls aren't much the issue but the actual size of the island is the issue. Also why it would seem older content runs better, because it's smaller data sizes being streamed. How that plays into Tanoa and performance I think will depend more on it's detail and data size rather than raw object count or anything render related. It's one of the reasons why I've always been a proponent of 64 bit binaries. I think it would be one alleviation of a problem, but only if they truly do away with the actual streaming and map completely to RAM, something which would probably require work on the engine which I think they are reluctant to do. It would probably increase the minimum RAM requirement to 8-12gb+ but if that's what's needed for a stable platform then so be it. RAM is honestly pretty cheap anymore. Hi mate, This is more of an observation rather than based on quantitative data but I tend to agree that 64 bit would be nicer for data streaming (so that when you enter a new area it wouldn't do that "grind" effect as it loads new mesh and textures it). I would also say though that if it ran AI on diff cores natively, that would really go a long way to make the experience smooth when playing. I often experience a distinct slowdown when AI get tripped into "combat" that I don't get if I slave them off to HC and let that handle their routines. It's a pita to code missions for HC though so I'd also like to see the game handle it within the process and spawn a new thread to control them (or at least spawn a new binary to handle the AI and move all AI data to it without the mission maker having to do it themself). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainAzimuth 714 Posted June 20, 2015 For comparison, a flat 100 is ~37% of 270, so round up to 40% (percentage of Altian land mass) and we'd be looking at ~108 km2, though we have yet to get an actual island count for Tanoa...Someone shares my skepticism... all three base game military factions would be of use in Tanoa simply for having even one wheeled amphibious APC per faction, each of whose capabilities are a qualitative advantage over the ability of a MRAP to go ashore, and to reiterate what I previously said, the fact that the Mohawk only has the slingloading threshold of a Ghost Hawk means that the Striders would have to go ashore while the Hunter can be put ashore by a Huron and the Ifrit by a Taru. (I'm discounting quantity because that's up to the mission maker.)You mean the very theaters/terrain types which Bohemia was specifically trying to avoid when deciding the Expansion terrain? I wouldn't find it plausible for them to have not seen the infantry gameplay difference coming. Hmmm, well, i think we should just consider that the base game for, "Vanilla" factions, of course can be used in the new Terrain, because Arma 3 is a Sandbox. But, i'm honestly excited for the new ones, and even more for the assets that they will/could bring. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites