New terrain reveal - Tanoa

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

I just hope they go for more traditional/contemporary uniform models/gear/weapons, even if in the end they are still fictional factions and camos.

Also i wonder what new interesting locations will be featured.

Altis has the hotel, soccer field with track, a couple castles, the embassy and whatnot.

Who knows, maybe we get another new LHD like the Canberra class the Aussies use.

Given the proximity of this island to Australia I damn well hope we have some sort of appearance. Even if it's just SASR or something like that.

[BadHabitz 235]

Of course nobody will read this on page 102. However, why the f has my separate thread if there will be a Tanoa-Beta (or even Alpha) been deleted??

Because that can be discussed here too. No reason to have multiple threads on the topic.

[chortles 263]

It's clearly a storytelling/visual tool to illustrate how advanced/high-tech the CSAT is. To the point that every soldier is issued one and it's no big deal for them. Wherever they go, each individual can keep comfortable temperature. It's slightly chilly in the night outside? Dial it up a few degrees, etc.

While the "low-tech" NATO deals with that by letting their guys wear short/no sleeves and lug hydration packs.

Also BIS wanted something cool and scifi as the enemy , so they designed that - without thinking how it can be useful in the battle tho

Nailed it in one, both of you. :D

Although -- I say this as someone who both actually likes the "bug head" and micro-climate control system (MCCS) aesthetic for the reason that Sniperwolf572 described, and who accepts Bohemia's "storyteller's prerogative" to have OPFOR equipment leapfrog past BLUFOR's in seeming technological sophistication instead of the other way around -- I just can't wrap my head around how the official "asymmetrical" soldier protection (it's deliberate, there was an OPREP about it) of greater head/extremities protection at the expense of torso protection (however superior to NATO or AAF uniforms without plate carriers) could be plausibly translated into an actual in-universe doctrinal decision, especially when both CSAT and NATO had "uparmed" to 6.5 x 39 mm.

Not too bad. Just hope we have seen The last of the futuristic "bug head".

Hardly, I can't see the PLA not fielding "the good shit" when "the CSAT force that seems to speak Farsi almost exclusively" was already fielding 'em in enough numbers to equip a whole mech brigade's worth of infantry, although the PLA could instead use their own design.

I wonder what the Army gets to do in the Pacific, or if we'll just be seeing Marines.

What, you thought only LCACs could bring main battle tanks ashore?

While the US Army ceded the amphibious warfare role to the US Marine Corps, that isn't a universal divide around the world -- hell, the PLA Ground Force's designated-amphibious strength reportedly outnumbers the entire PLA Marine Corps by roughly 3:1, while the burgeoning Japanese amphibious force is organizationally Ground Self-Defense Force instead of Maritime Self-Defense Force. Moreover, before said ceding-of-the-role the US Army had its own history of landings in WWII, not just at Normandy but in the Pacific as well, right alongside the Marines. Bohemia could just declare that in the twenty-year gap in between Arma games the US Army took on more of a role in the Armaverse version of the "Pacific pivot", especially (but not only) if there was a parallel to then-Commander, USPACOM Admiral Locklear's stating in March 2014 that USPACOM hadn't been allocated enough assets for the USMC/USN to carry out a contested amphibious operation.

I think the NATO faction represents kind of a US unified gear Armed Forces. After all it wouldn't be the first time that the Army and the Marines wear the same uniform (BDU anyone?)

Truthbetold the only signifier to me that Bohemia based "NATO" on the US/British Armies is the use of the eight-soldier squad/section in Editor/Zeus Groups instead of a USMC-style squad.

[mistyronin 1181]

before said ceding-of-the-role the US Army had its own history of landings in WWII, not just at Normandy but in the Pacific as well, right alongside the Marines. Bohemia could just declare that in the twenty-year gap in between

Well.

In fact the USMC took an important part in the planing of the Normandy Landings (well they should be called Calvados Coast, as they were not in Normandy).

But yeah, tho the USMC are the experts and more adequate for disembarks, they don't have the monopoly of them. As you well said in WW2 in the Pacific the US Army took an important part too.

But also in the recent invasions of Grenada (half USMC half Army) and Panama.

(in the same way that BTW the USMC participated in ground combat in Iraq and A-Stan, were the experts are the Army)

[Chairborne 2594]

To be fair both in Panama and Grenada each branch stuck with its specialty, though.

And even in the Falklands, most British Paras were inserted by landing craft instead of more traditional means.

So there isn't really a golden rule, if the situation demands it the commanders adapt for what's best, in the end it's just a difference in how troops make the initial deployment and nothing more, Afghanistan is a testament to that.

Marines were even the only ones to ever deploy tanks throughout the entire war, while the US Army didn't.

But regardless, this is now pretty much a game with fictional factions so i don't see why BI should feel bound to any real life constriction.

I also remember reading several debates during the years about decommissioning the USMC or moving it under the Army, maybe it will still be NATO, with new guns and camouflage and that's about it, then another local faction like CDF and other militias/armies for the other sides as well (fingers crossed for BI dropping Starship Troopers uniform designs :cool: ).

[rübe 127]

BIS should give us a faction of an "uncivilized" tribe.

Now that'd be something.

Edited June 28, 2015 by ruebe

[das attorney 858]

BIS should give us a faction of an uncivilized tribe.

Now that'd be something.

Fists, daggers, blowpipes, bows, spears, bolas and swords! :)

I'd like to see it but I don't think they would/can go that far.

I would ask for horses with FFV :)

[onlyrazor 11]

BIS should give us a faction of an uncivilized tribe.

With advanced and groundbreaking "become a technological demigod" and "create your own cargo cult" mechanics!

Slightly less off-topic and just as unlikely to ever occur, if BIS want to improve the naval and island-hopping gameplay of the expansion, what we really need is one of these:

[mistyronin 1181]

Slightly less off-topic and just as unlikely to ever occur, if BIS want to improve the naval and island-hopping gameplay of the expansion, what we really need is one of these:

http://photos.wikimapia.org/p/00/00/18/17/25_big.jpg

Well, this would make more sense, the TA-600:

(China Daily) Seaplane about to enter trial production

It's gonna be on service in the PLA Navy this year or the next.

AVIC states that the aircraft will be suitable for aerial firefighting dropping 12 tonnes of water, and search and rescue operations for 50 passengers. Sources also note that that the aircraft could also have strategic value in the South China Sea, which has been subject to various territorial disputes.

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

Just thought about it, what if we got some airborne tanks that are sling loadable?

Here's a Sheridan: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/67/CH54B_and_M551_Sheridan.jpg

[roguetrooper 2]

Because that can be discussed here too. No reason to have multiple threads on the topic.

Such monster threads are actually useless. Nobody reads them from the beginning to the end and things somewhere inbetween just sink into oblivion. A proper discussion about certain aspects is hardly possible since many different things spam away each other.

Sorry for being a [insert whatever you want], but my question about a Tanoa-Beta (or even Alpha) seems more relevant to me on the topic than most of the rest being written here. At least more than jungle tribes and hex camo. Also, a readable and separate topic about a beta can be answered on the first page by the devs with a simple yes or no. At least now I am more interested in a beta than what new camo will there be and all this.

[mistyronin 1181]

Such monster threads are actually useless. Nobody reads them from the beginning to the end and things somewhere inbetween just sink into oblivion. A proper discussion about certain aspects is hardly possible since many different things spam away each other.

Sorry for being a [insert whatever you want], but my question about a Tanoa-Beta (or even Alpha) seems more relevant to me on the topic than most of the rest being written here. At least more than jungle tribes and hex camo. Also, a readable and separate topic about a beta can be answered on the first page by the devs with a simple yes or no. At least now I am more interested in a beta than what new camo will there be and all this.

In any case:

§18) No public discussion on how the forum is moderated

If you have questions/complaints/comments about the forum or moderators please Private Message them to a moderator, we will do our utmost to reply to any that we receive. If you have an issue that you feel cannot be solved by another moderator then please Private Message the Bohemia Interactive Forum Moderation Team Leader (BohemiaBeck), he will be happy to look into the matter. You may also ask your questions in the "Ask a mod" thread; however that thread is not to be used to attack/rant against specific moderators or about specific rules but more for questions/answers.

[BadHabitz 235]

Such monster threads are actually useless. Nobody reads them from the beginning to the end and things somewhere inbetween just sink into oblivion. A proper discussion about certain aspects is hardly possible since many different things spam away each other.

Sorry for being a [insert whatever you want], but my question about a Tanoa-Beta (or even Alpha) seems more relevant to me on the topic than most of the rest being written here. At least more than jungle tribes and hex camo. Also, a readable and separate topic about a beta can be answered on the first page by the devs with a simple yes or no. At least now I am more interested in a beta than what new camo will there be and all this.

Your thread asking if there will be a beta for Tanoa was pretty useless as well. Someone from BI will give us info when they're ready to. At this point anything regarding that issue would be mere speculation and guessing, and we don't need multiple threads of gossip.

[jumpinghubert 49]

We need a petition for tanoa-railroad with these advanced physics http://s1.germany.travel/media/content/staedte___kultur_1/staedte/augsburg/FIFA11_Augsburger_Puppenkiste_Jim_Knopf_Lukas_und_Emma_RET_1024x768.jpg

[IndeedPete 1038]

We need a petition for tanoa-railroad with these advanced physics http://s1.germany.travel/media/content/staedte___kultur_1/staedte/augsburg/FIFA11_Augsburger_Puppenkiste_Jim_Knopf_Lukas_und_Emma_RET_1024x768.jpg

I second that!

"Eine Insel mit zwei Bergen und dem tiefen, weiten Meer..." :D

[Callsign 128]

@ruebe - Let's not call people from those communities 'uncivilised' - I appreciate the italics though - I suspect I'm preaching to the converted. Indigenous or Tribal peoples/ communities would be more appropriate and sympathetic and moves us away from the deeply troubling history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism.

This was actually something I'd thought about when they first announced Tanoa, but I am really hesitant about communities like that being represented in a game without them being represented poorly (as unintentionally as that may be). I'd advise BIS to stay well away unless they intend committing serious effort into representing communities like that with dignity. I do think a game could be made, just not as a sideline to a military simulator/ FPS.

[dale0404 5]

Such monster threads are actually useless.

I am the author of this thread and I am extremely proud of the 98,748 views and 1040 replies!

(tongue in cheek guys)! :p

[rübe 127]

@ruebe - Let's not call people from those communities 'uncivilised' - I appreciate the italics though

Hey, because it's you, I even went back and put some quotes in there too. :cool:

[...]but I am really hesitant about communities like that being represented in a game without them being represented poorly (as unintentionally as that may be)

:plain:

Why would a game(!) have to represent the world (or whatever entities in it) in a cautiously "respectful" way? Isn't a game allowed to simply "draw" its own picture?! Would you be offended by such a tribe faction just being hostile towards any other faction? What exactly needs to be represented, and what must not be shown for such a tribe to be not poorly represented anyways? And while we're at it, are existing factions represented up to your standards? Is calling those other people "BUGS" in order to dehumanize them ok for you?

[...]committing serious effort into representing communities like that with dignity

Dignity, hu? I can follow you up to the following point: if such tribes people would be "represented" ingame as animals/agents that just spawn in deep jungle or something, like any other wild animal, yeah, then I can see how that could make a difference. But if you make those guys just men, and then a faction (with hostility levels that can be adjusted by the mission designer), then they're on the exact same level as the NATO guys, or those bugs with their fancy hats. Isn't this enough "dignity"? Where's (or could be) the problem? Silly sounds/animations? Too much nudity? Unfair/crappy assets?

IMHO your argument is completely void. How some faction is being represented is completely in the hands of a mission designer. Anyone can be the next "monster" or a bunch of brainwashed puppets, or white-flag swinging frenchies (hihi), whatever. For all I care, such a faction could just populate a single island, far away from the main story - sort of like good ol' Yeti on chernarus.

Just make sure we have the tribe configured for all sides (like current FIA), such that we can come up with our own scenarios in order to have amazing inner-tribe/tribe vs. tribe fights!

[gibonez 18]

Since Tanoa is such a similiar terrain to say Vietnam with heavy brush and cover I wonder if Artillery will now play a bigger role.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SscN-aBYHNI

[Kydoimos 916]

In all seriousness though, if BIS include this, I'll be very happy:

It's got to be the next logical step from Altis' cat sharks, right? :)

[Callsign 128]

Since I'm not sure whether you're just trolling, I'll humour you.

Why would a game(!) have to represent the world (or whatever entities in it) in a cautiously "respectful" way?

Because even game developers are part of the wider global community and need to be sensitive to needs of other people (Look what happened to Ivan and Martin on Lemnos for example). This is especially sensitive given how communities like indigenous groups have been treated by people (usually from the west) in the past and how native communities are still portrayed today.

Isn't a game allowed to simply "draw" its own picture?! Would you be offended by such a tribe faction just being hostile towards any other faction? What exactly needs to be represented, and what must not be shown for such a tribe to be not poorly represented anyways? And while we're at it, are existing factions represented up to your standards? Is calling those other people "BUGS" in order to dehumanize them ok for you?

I'm not going to get fully into the ethics of the portrayal of real people in games (or films, or literature) with you, you can simply google how problematic that is. Since I'm not from an indigenous group I can't really comment on 'standards', but you could probably narrow it down to how realistically they are portrayed compared to how they are in real life. Characters in games saying 'bugs' is fine (since you're portraying the character as racist or derrogatory), - that is not BIS personnally insulting Iranians - even if they are in trouble with them anyway for using them as a faction that is vaguely defined as an aggressor in the Armaverse storyline.

Dignity, hu? I can follow you up to the following point: if such tribes people would be "represented" ingame as animals/agents that just spawn in deep jungle or something, like any other wild animal, yeah, then I can see how that could make a difference.

That's exactly the type of thing that would be offensive.

But if you make those guys just men, and then a faction (with hostility levels that can be adjusted by the mission designer), then they're on the exact same level as the NATO guys, or those bugs with their fancy hats. Isn't this enough "dignity"? Where's (or could be) the problem? Silly sounds/animations? Too much nudity?

This would be fine. They'd then be 'equal' in terms of how they are portrayed compared to the other factions in the game. What I would be more concerned about would be how they would be portrayed in a campaign or mission, how their beliefs or society would be represented.

IMHO your argument is completely void. How some faction is being represented is completely in the hands of a mission designer. Anyone can be the next "monster" or a bunch of brainwashed puppets, or white-flag swinging frenchies (hihi), whatever. For all I care, such a faction could just populate a single island, far away from the main story - sort of like good ol' Yeti on chernarus.

Exactly, if you a portraying a real group of people in a game, how you do it matters. Since how indigenous communities/ groups have been treated in the past, being respectful, or portraying them as equal to any other human beings is the very least games developers and we can do. Comparing real life communities to a fictional monster is offensive. They are not some exotic plaything to be added to a game as background setting.

I actually love how all the different factions are recreated in Arma by all the different modders - I love the kind of international spirit the game fosters in representing different units. I think BIS does a pretty good job too - or at least has learnt from some very painful lessons.

Since this is wildly off topic now - can we carry on with discussing the new terrain? Do we know for example how many of the buildings will be enterable?

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

After looking through airborne tanks, I think we should get a Sheridan. Not only can it be slingloaded, loaded and dropped out of a C-130, and it can swim across rivers. And since it was created for Vietnam, well, Tanoa is pretty close. Sure it's outdated, but BIS should remaster it.

But still, this tank would prove a big advantage for NATO forces. And since helicopters would be very useful, yeah. Slingload the tank. :D

[chortles 263]

After looking through airborne tanks, I think we should get a Sheridan. Not only can it be slingloaded, loaded and dropped out of a C-130, and it can swim across rivers. And since it was created for Vietnam, well, Tanoa is pretty close. Sure it's outdated, but BIS should remaster it.

But still, this tank would prove a big advantage for NATO forces. And since helicopters would be very useful, yeah. Slingload the tank. :D

http://sedaliahobby.com/images/acys1015.jpg

Here's the problem: Hope do you plausibly get it down to a weight where it can be sling loaded by a helicopter? I can't really see a sling loading mechanic for fixed-wing besides a Fulton-style system (VBS2/3 helicopter sling loading can resemble this but not Bohemia's own implementation) and the Sheridan already exceeds the limits of what the Taru can airlift by a quarter, and in the Huron's case by half...

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

Here's the problem: Hope do you plausibly get it down to a weight where it can be sling loaded by a helicopter? I can't really see a sling loading mechanic for fixed-wing besides a Fulton-style system (VBS2/3 helicopter sling loading can resemble this but not Bohemia's own implementation) and the Sheridan already exceeds the limits of what the Taru can airlift by a quarter, and in the Huron's case by half...

Bigger helicopters. :p

That's a good point but I think BIS should at least consider something like the Sheridan.

[chortles 263]

Bigger helicopters. :p

That's a good point but I think BIS should at least consider something like the Sheridan.

Therein lies the problem... Bohemia can throw out current 'all MBT' doctrine by authorial fiat so that amphibious tanks make sense, but you'd need a new helicopter just for airlift of this one tank -- and I doubt that it could carry any heavier besides this tank -- to say nothing of it having been deemed too light to resist HMG fire at the time.

At least with the current Huron and Taru you could go up to the first two of the BMD series, but the second (and third which is almost a tonne over the Taru's threshold) rock the 30 mm 2A42 (and ATGMs), while only the heaviest BMD-4 (13.6 tonnes) has a 100 mm gun...

Edited June 29, 2015 by Chortles