Iron Front in Arm3 LITE - preview versions

[SterlingC 17]

So many awesome updates coming. I'm especially excited about hipfire and hope it'll make its way to other mods. Great work! 

[froggyluv 2135]

Also I dont know if it matters -but the email verifier on your troubleshooting website (Phabricator?) is not working properly. Ive sent multiple email verification requests but they never arrive. Hopefully you can still see my troubleshooting report

 

P.S: I found some strategic ways to get your AI AT team to take out a tank using alot of Stealth, Hold fires and getting particular players at particular angles and distances. No way an AI led squad can do this as of now 😄

[.kju 3244]

@corporal_lib[br] Iron Front standalone has no more relation to this project on a legal level. DeepSilver and X1 own that game, and we have no relation nor access to their ownership system.

[froggyluv 2135]

Is there any way to get a printout of the custom damage report for Vehicles? For instance "Right hull penetrated by xxby missile blown transmission" -kinda stuff. Like how strategy games do it

[froggyluv 2135]

Ah nevermind -found it getAllHitPointsDamage

[pognivet 151]

you fellows plan on adding any artillery to armies besides the Germans?

[.kju 3244]

See: https://suggestionbox.ww2ina3.com/

[x al 1]

IF campaigns, missions and more are coming to ARMA3 as a paid DLC? Wow, I was hoping, it might happen, but obviously it is in it's final stages.

"Shut up and take my Money" (work needs to be rewarded, even if I own Iron Front already)

Release: 2020 or 2021?

[.kju 3244]

As always stated very openly from the start, we have an agreement with AWAR being able to use their work in A3 under the condition to realize a commercial version eventually. Hence the IF campaigns and HQ textures are not available yet.

 

However once we have any news to share on this topic, we will be sure to announce it here.

For now we are committed to improve and maintain IFA3 as best we can, as well as we have more content on the way in the future, so look forward to that!

 

If you want to learn more and follow our progress, make sure to join our discord for WIP media, our public discussions and progress reports. 🙏

 

 

 

On that note:

 

 

 

 

by Hicks (more at https://www.artstation.com/artwork/8ln3Yq)

 

 

 

 

 

 

by @petrtlach

[El Tyranos 1264]

Dear WW2 community,

 

Two and a half years ago, we introduced new US tanks in the « US Armored Forces Update », then gliders in the « US Airborne Update » and finally German artillery guns in « Blitzkrieg Update ». All those additions would not have been possible without the blessing of former Invasion 44 Team members who allowed us to keep their work alive a little bit longer.

 

Those vehicles were introduced because they looked visually good enough - they were old but still fit for combat. However this is going to change in not too distant future. Indeed, in our continuous aim for consistency and bringing WW2 in Arma 3 to the best level of quality, we decided to replace most of the I44 assets that made it into IFA3.

 

Here are all those who will go for a well deserved retirement.

 

Only the Universal Carrier, Churchill tank, Nebelwerfer, and Delisle Carbine will remain for now. Those will have to wait a little longer. Let’s now focus on introducing the remastered content. Our goal is to have no content loss. Worse, we are adding variants for some of the vehicles. So fasten your seatbelts, we’ll go gradually.

 

A few defensive objects that needed to be refreshed, by V!nc3r

 

US Flamethrower by Lawz

 

Waco glider by Jove Chiere

 

Horsa Glider by ElTyranos and Jove Chiere

 

M8 Greyhound by Bax!

 

LeFH 18 by Hicks!

 

Sd.Kfzz 124 by Ignisum!

 

And finally the US steel beasts ! Note that M4 75mm Sherman (made by AWAR in IF DLC) will also say goodbye and be replaced for the sake of consistency. All shermans are done by Diabolical!

 

And the last but not the least, M5 Stuart tank by Ptertlach (CSA38 Team)

 

See you soon on the battlefield, and stay tuned to our discord for more exclusive pictures and development insights!

IFA3 Team out.

[Realthinged 44]

Fantastic news!!!

[Digger James 133]

Question! will it be possible for a "FURY" type Sherman? With a Commander 30.cal, and a 50.cal behind it with someone on the back? Now I'm not focussing on the tank itself but the Machine guns on the roof of the turret.



 

 

[Gunter Severloh 4052]

Can someone tell me what the function was of the gate and the 2 posts with the mines on them seen in the pic below?

Were the posts for when the water rose so that the mines would be a the level of the sea, or another reason,

i mean how would anyone trip those mines off?

[Bish91 30]

23 minutes ago, Gunter Severloh said:

Can someone tell me what the function was of the gate and the 2 posts with the mines on them seen in the pic below?

Were the posts for when the water rose so that the mines would be a the level of the sea, or another reason,

i mean how would anyone trip those mines off?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rommel's_asparagus

[petrtlach 1375]

On 10/6/2019 at 1:21 PM, Digger James said:

Question! will it be possible for a "FURY" type Sherman? With a Commander 30.cal, and a 50.cal behind it with someone on the back? Now I'm not focussing on the tank itself but the Machine guns on the roof of the turret.

 

This idea its problem. Use weapons need "turret"...not posible for use crews ...... RHS think system use for player no for AI as script but in base mode not posiblem. In GM DLC too not posible. I delete MG if not posible use. Engine....engine....

Edited October 9, 2019 by Dedmen
Removed images. Rule 14

[froggyluv 2135]

So back to my unhealthy AI AT footman decision woes. It seems that because the PanzerSchreck soldier starts with his RPzB Anti-Tank launcher -unloaded. THIS seems to be a major contributor in them not firing when they have a wide open shot at enemy armor point blank in front of hem.

 

I placed about 12 of them surrounding an enemy American Sherman (no fuel/no ammo) and NONE of them take the shot! That is disturbing. They all shoulder their launcher, have some moment of "erhm, maybe not", unshoulder their weapon and proceed to Chicken Dance. I then add 1 modern day NATO AT Lite soldier to their troop and he 100% of the times, shoulders his weapon and fires. the difference../ His weapon starts pre-loaded.

 

Save the WW2 AT men kju

[Kerc Kasha 102]

On 10/10/2019 at 1:25 PM, froggyluv said:

So back to my unhealthy AI AT footman decision woes. It seems that because the PanzerSchreck soldier starts with his RPzB Anti-Tank launcher -unloaded. THIS seems to be a major contributor in them not firing when they have a wide open shot at enemy armor point blank in front of hem.

 

I placed about 12 of them surrounding an enemy American Sherman (no fuel/no ammo) and NONE of them take the shot! That is disturbing. They all shoulder their launcher, have some moment of "erhm, maybe not", unshoulder their weapon and proceed to Chicken Dance. I then add 1 modern day NATO AT Lite soldier to their troop and he 100% of the times, shoulders his weapon and fires. the difference../ His weapon starts pre-loaded.

 

Save the WW2 AT men kju

I updated the ticket regarding this but i'll repeat it here too.

 

The unloaded launcher issue is fixed.

I've adjusted the minimum accuracy for AI using our launchers, they can fairly reliably hit targets now (but not 360 noscope unless you set them to accuracy 1 or whatever)

AT grenades are... better. the ai seems really stupid with grenades in general, most of the time when I tested it the grenades killijng their group mates werent the AT grenades, it was frag grenades from other people in their group throwing them at the tank, landing near the guy who had to move up to throw an AT grenade.

 

But apart from that it seems much better

[pappagoat 6]

Hello,

I'm making some airborne related missions. Can you chaps look at changing the descent speed of the parachutes? They are far too fast. The T-5 and X-Type had descent speeds of about 7 m/s. This will also remedy injury/death incurred in game when landing.

[tanin69 17]

Hello dear community, hello ifa3 lite team !

 

This post is about balancing range distances on tanks (Sherman and tiger at least) and artillery (pak 36 at least). These 4 assets share the same settings about their ranges : min/mid/maxRange, which far from historical realism (gun config in cfgWeapons). One example is a flak 36 not engaging a sherman under 1500 m. and the Sherman engaging at the same distance.

 

Do you agree to set better parameters about these guns ? If the team is Ok, I can make a proposition about ranges for these guns and provide sources. About min/mid/maxRangeProbab, as I don't know how many times minute (or a second) the probabilty is calculated, I'm a poor help at the moment to make propositions.

 

Two basic and safe corrections might be done :

- in the "far" subclass increasing maxRange value to 2000 m. for all 88 guns

- on the same item for sherman, decreasing maxRange value to 1000 m.

 

I've collected historical data, mainly on the 88 flak gun. The 88 is also mounted on tiger 1.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8.8_cm_Flak_18/36/37/41#Support_of_ground_troops

http://lesffi.vraiforum.com/t1556-Canon-AA-Flak-8-8-cm-18-36-37-41-43-en-cour.htm (french)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8.8_cm_KwK_36#Penetration_comparison

http://mr-home.staff.shef.ac.uk/hobbies/ww2pen3.pdf

So,  that do you think about that, guys 😁?

 

[Barden 296]

8 hours ago, tanin69 said:

- in the "far" subclass increasing maxRange value to 2000 m. for all 88 guns

- on the same item for sherman, decreasing maxRange value to 1000 m.

 

Whilst I agree with the maxRange increase on those large guns, the decreasing of range of the Shermans makes no sense. Shermans would happily lob HE or WP rounds at that distance to kill a flak gun firing at it.

The Optics in the Sherman (Or most American vehicles) are set up for exactly that, to act as Artillery when need be because the target you are most likely engaging is enemy Infantry in a fortified position:

(Please note the M70F although was used in the M4A3 75W it was still a 3X scope with a 12 degree 19-minute FOV the exact same as earlier Sherman model's M55, M70's were just higher quality images)

[.kju 3244]

@tanin69 these are only parameters relevant for AI. in addition they use them only as guidance in decision making - the actual decision is however based on other inputs and parameters.

[.kju 3244]

Preview v38 hotfix 1 is out

 

Changelog:

http://ww2ina3.com/wiki/index.php?title=WW2_Changelog:_Preview_v38_-_2019-09-12#Preview_v38_hotfix_1_-_2019-10-24

 

Download:

http://ww2ina3.com/wiki/index.php?title=WW2_Download (to become available later tonight or tomorrow)

 

Server admin patch (27 MB):

superseded by hotfix 2 (includes hotfix 1)

 

[Kerc Kasha 102]

20 hours ago, .kju said:

@tanin69 these are only parameters relevant for AI. in addition they use them only as guidance in decision making - the actual decision is however based on other inpus and parameters.

and to add... these values are standardized across all cannons, so if you're seeing different values its a result of another mod

[tanin69 17]

1 hour ago, Kerc Kasha said:

these values are standardized across all cannons, so if you're seeing different values its a result of another mod

This is precisely the problem : all values are the same, whereas those guns have really different ranges.

 

23 hours ago, Barden said:

Whilst I agree with the maxRange increase on those large guns, the decreasing of range of the Shermans makes no sense. Shermans would happily lob HE or WP rounds at that distance to kill a flak gun firing at it.

That's OK for me.

 

22 hours ago, .kju said:

@tanin69 these are only parameters relevant for AI.

Of course. The consequence is that a Flak operated by an AI will not engage at a realistic distance. Shermans have the possibility to get close enough to shoot efficently at the Flak. Rommel, help me 😄 !

 

22 hours ago, .kju said:

@tanin69 In addition they use them only as guidance in decision making - the actual decision is however based on other inpus and parameters.

You are right. But tell me if I am wrong : maxRange is "hard" parameter that can't be "overriden" ? For example, I tried to force shoot over 1500 m. by scripting, with no effect. Am I right ?

 

To be clear, I have no intention to "force" you to change this settings. It's just to be sure you consider (or not) this type of tuning interesting for the mod. We can patch this in our modset.

[churrofighter 25]

On 10/24/2019 at 5:50 PM, .kju said:

Preview v38 hotfix 1 is out

 

Changelog:

http://ww2ina3.com/wiki/index.php?title=WW2_Changelog:_Preview_v38_-_2019-09-12#Preview_v38_hotfix_1_-_2019-10-24

 

Download:

http://ww2ina3.com/wiki/index.php?title=WW2_Download (to become available later tonight or tomorrow)

 

Server admin patch (27 MB):

https://mega.nz/#!wsdw2CBa!tB1b4X0-OkH4B7ZZFwgDnRXd1wKrZ0Cm3EPK8nes-CU

https://drive.google.com/open?id=13j8EpN0bsooDpESiwj6kwLol9TSbiY2q

 

Download links don't seem to work 😕