Jump to content
Maio

Arma 3 - APEX - NEWS and SPECULATIONS

Recommended Posts

Why not? We're talking 20 years into the future. The M16 is in service in the US Armed Forces since 1962.and not likely to be replaced that quickly - I am sure there will still be some in service in 2035. I always found the complete exchange of equipment used in the NATO faction to be very unrealistic. I don't see a reason why a guerrilla faction shouldn't be using old Soviet/Russian equipment in 20 years. It makes more sense to me than having FIA use their own rifle instead of having scavenged either CSAT or (more likely) AAF rifles. When I think guerrilla, I always think Kalashnikov.

When I think Guerilla, I think what ever weapon is available in their country. They won't magically sport AK's of there are none historically available to them. I don't mind AK's and old T-72's... But this is 2035 were talking about. Sure, they'd probably still be around, but the T-72's would be barley effective against advanced tech. Secondly, and archipelago with T-72's... Highly unlikely. BMP's are more believable, but with the way China has Norinco with its vastly modernized BMP's, hardly anyone would miss out on a deal to grab the modern version over the older.

Personally though, I think the good old T-72's and AK's should stay where they belong... In OFP, Arma 1, and Arma 2. BI need to give us something new that's worth it's name in glory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally though, I think the good old T-72's and AK's should stay where they belong... In OFP, Arma 1, and Arma 2. BI need to give us something new that's worth it's name in glory.

malaysian poland PT 91 with ERA is a t72......

PT-91M_Pendekar.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope they add tanks, important part being new map.The map is archipelago which consist of

many islands separated with planes of water.Does every island have bridge?Or are tanks amphibious,

those are important design question when dealing with tanks.

 

Hopefully they decided to create tank assets.

 

It kind of makes sense since they enabled while ago PhyXtank simulation to swim in the water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

malaysian poland PT 91 with ERA is a t72......PT-91M_Pendekar.jpg

Pretty much what meant. Modernized versions are fine. But old untouched, stock t-72's? No way. Though a modern AK is op because 107 has no recoil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I think Guerilla, I think what ever weapon is available in their country. They won't magically sport AK's of there are none historically available to them. I don't mind AK's and old T-72's... But this is 2035 were talking about. Sure, they'd probably still be around, but the T-72's would be barley effective against advanced tech. Secondly, and archipelago with T-72's... Highly unlikely. BMP's are more believable, but with the way China has Norinco with its vastly modernized BMP's, hardly anyone would miss out on a deal to grab the modern version over the older.

I wish it was like that, but in the game, FIA features their own rifle that isn't used by anyone, namely the Tavor. I would expect guerrillas to either use the weapons that the enemy is using (Which would be the FN F2000/Mk20 in this case) or something cheap. Like AK's, which are by far cheaper to get than Tavors (quarter of the price), and readily available on a black market, and most of all, in ridiculously large numbers. AK's outnumber all other assault rifles combined.

 

As I said, I don't expect this to dramatically change over the next 20 years. The US Army will probably still be using M4's and M16's.

 

And in Arrowhead, the Takistani Militia was using BTR-40. Yeah, they were an extremely low-tech faction with extremely outdated material. Which is fine for a guerrilla faction.

 

I know why things turned out how the turned out, and I am not trying to blame anyone. I have 2600 hours in the game, which clearly shows that I don't hate it regardless of what people have claimed about me. Authentic, existing and realistic equipment is my personal preference, nothing more, nothing less.

 

Personally though, I think the good old T-72's and AK's should stay where they belong... In OFP, Arma 1, and Arma 2. BI need to give us something new that's worth it's name in glory.

I am both happy and relieved that the modder community thinks different.

Incidentally, my favorite weapon from the Marksmen DLC is the M14. A real gun.

 

But anyway, I wasn't trying to discuss the pros and cons. Since the thread is about speculation, I speculated that maybe one of these vehicles might be in. Reasons:A certain YouTube video showing Bohemia guys recording a BMP-2, and a statement in this roadmap post stating that APEX will include "more familiar / modern-day armaments".

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish it was like that, but in the game, FIA features their own rifle that isn't used by anyone, namely the Tavor. I would expect guerrillas to either use the weapons that the enemy is using (Which would be the FN F2000/Mk20 in this case) or something cheap. Like AK's, which are by far cheaper to get than Tavors (quarter of the price), and readily available on a black market, and most of all, in ridiculously large numbers. AK's outnumber all other assault rifles combined.

 

As I said, I don't expect this to dramatically change over the next 20 years. The US Army will probably still be using M4's and M16's.

 

And in Arrowhead, the Takistani Militia was using BTR-40. Yeah, they were an extremely low-tech faction with extremely outdated material. Which is fine for a guerrilla faction.

 

I know why things turned out how the turned out, and I am not trying to blame anyone. I have 2600 hours in the game, which clearly shows that I don't hate it regardless of what people have claimed about me. Authentic, existing and realistic equipment is my personal preference, nothing more, nothing less.

 

I am both happy and relieved that the modder community thinks different.

Incidentally, my favorite weapon from the Marksmen DLC is the M14. A real gun.

 

But anyway, I wasn't trying to discuss the pros and cons. Since the thread is about speculation, I speculated that maybe one of these vehicles might be in. Reasons:A certain

showing Bohemia guys recording a BMP-2, and a statement in this roadmap post stating that APEX will include "more familiar / modern-day armaments".

I guess. Heh, the Mk-1 EMR is my favorite, and while almost legitimately a real gun (Sig), just up chambered to 7.62. It satisfies the want and need. It fits the profile of a classic M-4, but sports a modern design, with the punch needed to get the job done. BI also mentioned they wanted an antique gun, that of which they were originally going to make the Dragonov, but ended up making it the M-14. It's possible they might do the same with the expansion, perhaps with a vehicle, or something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

BI also mentioned they wanted an antique gun, that of which they were originally going to make the Dragonov, but ended up making it the M-14. It's possible they might do the same with the expansion, perhaps with a vehicle, or something else.

 

Something like the good old Willys MB as Light Strike Vehicle :yay:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something like the good old Willys MB as Light Strike Vehicle :yay:

Oh jeez. Hahaha, Idk man, that thing looks about ready to go into retirement. If I had to guess what LSV they would use... I would have to stand by the Flyer. It's armament capabilities out match a decent amount of systems right now, capable of a 30mm turret is kind of a deal maker. I'm also most interested in Naval assets though, because it's never been done in Arma. Now with physics, they could make use of decent capabilities of supply transport and intense archipelago warfare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In any case, for me it would be a no-brainer whether I want to buy it or not (I am supporter so I already have it anyway). My count is currently 2600 hours of Arma 3. I think even with my high entry fee for the supporter edition, this comes out at around 2 or so euro cent per hour. That is a damn good deal if I ever saw one :)

Food for thought: The Apex Edition comes out to US$10 more than the base game, but base game alpha buyers or DDE buyers ($33) who pre-order Apex ($28) and get the DLC Bundle during the current 50% discount sale ($12.49) pay barely more than Apex Edition buyers. Gotta admit, I like that about how Apex and the Apex Edition were priced... and for those who still find Apex too expensive, wasn't Operation Arrowhead more expensive over where you are upon release than a full-priced Apex?

Re: the "contemporary" talk: same Bohemia that decided even before the unfortunate events of our 2012 that the US Army had already made the changeover to SCARs only a few years after they had used M16s/M4s (and the USMC more recently) -- years ago in our own timeline considering when OA took place -- then to F2000s, and then finally to MXs, so even before the forced-by-real-life timeline changes Bohemia had US Army procurement working rather differently... though as DarkSideSixOfficial highlighted with Chinese industry but I mentioned with LSVs, they may also have a different definition of "contemporary" than others...

Since the thread is about speculation, I speculated that maybe one of these vehicles might be in. Reasons:A certain YouTube video showing Bohemia guys recording a BMP-2

Admittedly I don't weigh that heavily considering that at one point they (or at least Jan Dusek) were recording JAS 39 Gripen sounds before Arma 3 went to alpha... only for that sound work to end up in friggin' Carrier Command: Gaea Mission. *groan* Them outright saying to expect more contemporary stuff I can buy, but the recordings... not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, I forgot. Calculated the Apex full price around 34-35USD. Given its 27 currently with a 20% off, I would have to say even full priced Apex is still a straight up steal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: the "contemporary" talk: same Bohemia that decided even before the unfortunate events of our 2012 that the US Army had already made the changeover to SCARs only a few years after they had used M16s/M4s (and the USMC more recently) -- years ago in our own timeline considering when OA took place -- then to F2000s, and then finally to MXs, so even before the forced-by-real-life timeline changes Bohemia had US Army procurement working rather differently

 

A bit OT, but I was always curious about why BI chose the F2000 as the U.S. Army's primary weapon when the pre-Alpha screenies and videos were released back in 2011.

 

At least the Tavors sort of made sense since Israel and all of its industries were presumably taken over by Iran in the very first iteration of The East Wind, hence the all-Israeli (except for the Kajman) vehicle and weapon lineup for OPFOR. But it made absolutely no sense even by Armaverse standards for the U.S. Army to suddenly switch from the Mk16/Mk17 in the 2010s to using an older bullpup rifle in the 2030s.

 

Admittedly I don't weigh that heavily considering that at one point they (or at least Jan Dusek) were recording JAS 39 Gripen sounds before Arma 3 went to alpha... only for that sound work to end up in friggin' Carrier Command: Gaea Mission

 

To add onto that the T-72/BMP sounds could be just for a new tracked OPFOR MBT/IFV not based on either of those chassis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much what meant. Modernized versions are fine. But old untouched, stock t-72's? No way. Though a modern AK is op because 107 has no recoil.

 

AK12?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit OT, but I was always curious about why BI chose the F2000 as the U.S. Army's primary weapon when the pre-Alpha screenies and videos were released back in 2011.

 

At least the Tavors sort of made sense since Israel and all of its industries were presumably taken over by Iran in the very first iteration of The East Wind, hence the all-Israeli (except for the Kajman) vehicle and weapon lineup for OPFOR. But it made absolutely no sense even by Armaverse standards for the U.S. Army to suddenly switch from the Mk16/Mk17 in the 2010s to using an older bullpup rifle in the 2030s.

 

 

To add onto that the T-72/BMP sounds could be just for a new tracked OPFOR MBT/IFV not based on either of those chassis.

I think we may have had the F2000 as like, a potential replacement for the M4 way back in the ancient times or something but then didn't pursue it. I'm not positive. I thought it would've been cool to see some sort of modernized XM8. The MX looked very "plain", if that makes any sense. Why not go all the way if you're in the future environment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not go all the way if you're in the future environment?

Because of what works. When you look at fire arms, they are rugged, built to operate, not to be visually pleasing. However, some more modern firearms incorporate both, looks and functionality. But you must always remain functionality. So to go all out futuristic, you may end up with a gun too heavy, and ineffective at doing its job. I think this is one of the, consequently sad things, that plagued the Masada ACR, hands down one of the sexiest rifles ever made. But of course... I believe it had some issues, with its functionality. Not sure the whole story behind it though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we may have had the F2000 as like, a potential replacement for the M4 way back in the ancient times or something but then didn't pursue it. I'm not positive. I thought it would've been cool to see some sort of modernized XM8. The MX looked very "plain", if that makes any sense. Why not go all the way if you're in the future environment?

This was presumably back before sequestration killed all real-world hope -- as opposed to in the Armaverse -- but for a time there was the clamor (particularly thanks to reports about Wanat) that got congressional attention and forced our timeline's Army to at least make a show of giving a look at competitor systems. (The MX was reportedly designed by CMMG.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because of what works. When you look at fire arms, they are rugged, built to operate, not to be visually pleasing. However, some more modern firearms incorporate both, looks and functionality. But you must always remain functionality. So to go all out futuristic, you may end up with a gun too heavy, and ineffective at doing its job. I think this is one of the, consequently sad things, that plagued the Masada ACR, hands down one of the sexiest rifles ever made. But of course... I believe it had some issues, with its functionality. Not sure the whole story behind it though.

At least from a stylistic perspective (which is generally what I approach video games with because I at least consider some aspects of them to be art), you can lampshade the problems with existing systems away. Especially if it's a fictional system based off of an existing weapon. "Oh, uh, it's the BCR. Kind of like the ACR but they fixed all the problems or it never had the problems to begin with in the Armaverse."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least from a stylistic perspective (which is generally what I approach video games with because I at least consider some aspects of them to be art), you can lampshade the problems with existing systems away. Especially if it's a fictional system based off of an existing weapon. "Oh, uh, it's the BCR. Kind of like the ACR but they fixed all the problems or it never had the problems to begin with in the Armaverse."

Which is what Bohemia already did for some of the systems currently in A3 (i.e. AH-99 Blackfoot: "[e]ven though the construction dates back some time and the program faced cancelation in the first years of the 21st century, the project was finished successfully") while others are successors to legacy hardware. (As I've pointed out a bunch of times the Armaverse's A-10 reached the end of its life cycle right around when it was going to IRL before that one USAF budget, so that much was authentic.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing:
I thing it's too bad that BIS moved to "futuristic" whereas there are plenty of gear/vehicles/countries... that haven't been made yet. They could have stayed in XXth / early XXIth with other countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, I forgot. Calculated the Apex full price around 34-35USD. Given its 27 currently with a 20% off, I would have to say even full priced Apex is still a straight up steal.

 

 

It depends what's in it.

 

Currently, there is an island which they have shown very little of, plus a twin-engine prop plane and some other civ vehicles.

 

They should maybe play their cards less close to their chest if they want moar pre-order sales.  Otherwise, cool, I'll check out if it's worth it when it's released.

 

Obv, you could be cynical and get it once it's been playtested by eager people and bugfixed for less money on a Steam sale if you don't mind waiting for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thing it's too bad that BIS moved to "futuristic" whereas there are plenty of gear/vehicles/countries... that haven't been made yet. They could have stayed in XXth / early XXIth with other countries.

That's kind of what did happen going by the specific inventory of vehicles/gear, but they're not AKs and M4s and Humvees soooo... you get where I'm going with this, I imagine. ;)

Obv, you could be cynical and get it once it's been playtested by eager people and bugfixed for less money on a Steam sale if you don't mind waiting for a while.

On the other hand, the pre-release content drop on dev branch means that there will be an opportunity to give it a go/get feedback from others' playtesting while the pre-order discount is still in effect.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand, the pre-release content drop on dev branch means that there will be an opportunity to give it a go/get feedback from others' playtesting while the pre-order discount is still in effect.

 

Hey man, I'm a bit disenchanted with their feedback process - I follow their guidelines and give ticket & repro mission for bugs I think I've found, but a lot of them don't even get assigned or even looked at.  So TBH if they can't be bothered to follow their own feedback procedure, then I'm not going to waste time on it either.  

 

With that said, the opportunity to provide "feedback" on Tanoa prior to release doesn't give me any incentive to buy early.

 

:\

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I got ahold of this - http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/53bfe7bceab8ea390978d751-538/south-china-sea-map05.png

If someone could be so kind as to find the Arma 3 Campaign diagram in the Pacufic so we could compare the situation and what nations would likely be involved, or similarities at least in regards to CSAT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×