APEX - what about ships?

[lexx 1363]

You quote half of it, which changes the meaning...

[serjames 357]

Read your post again. You clearly state that most mods are not good. Compared to vanilla stuff. I choose to disagree with that sweeping statement. I stand by my opinion. RHS ACE TFAR ACRE etc etc. These all add significant improvements to the vanilla game. I'm sure if I looked harder I could find dozens more. Sorry :) I still disagree with your statement but it wasn't my intention to get into an argument over it. I don't think we should derail thread further etc. J

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

Read your post again. You clearly state that most mods are not good. Compared to vanilla stuff. I choose to disagree with that sweeping statement. I stand by my opinion. RHS ACE TFAR ACRE etc etc. These all add significant improvements to the vanilla game. I'm sure if I looked harder I could find dozens more. Sorry :) I still disagree with your statement but it wasn't my intention to get into an argument over it. I don't think we should derail thread further etc. J

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Please find dozens(!) more, since you already named most mods that even partially exceed BISs niveau in terms of quality (models, textures), there's few that come close to them (FFAR coming to mind).

 

Just look at a random civilian vehicle mod that's not a port from A2 and compare these vehicles to A3 civilian ones.

 

The amount of details the offroad has is amazing.

It is roughed up/dirty, right side mirror is missing, the front bumper on the right side looks like it has rear ended something probably resulting in the loss of the mentioned side mirror,

one wiper is missing, the rear door on the bed to the right side doesn't close properly, front bumper left side is missing a piece and it has dents all over the place.

It has character.

 

Most mod vehicles for civilians look like a bubblegum toy version of the real vehicle, totally out of place compared to vanilla content.

 

Is that a problem? No, since people are modding in their free time, don't charge for it and what mods you use is entirely up to yourself. Doesn't make their stuff look on par with BIS vanilla content though.

 

Cheers

[lexx 1363]

^ that's exactly what I mean. Mods are cool & everything (I am making a truckton of them myself already for over 10 years, duh), still most (not all, there are always exceptions to the rule) of them simply do not reach the quality level that BI offers.

[serjames 357]

I think we must be downloading different mods. *shrug*

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rydygier 1309]

If I may add, when I personally am thinking about mod's quality, it is also if not primarily about it's technical quality. Flawless config/scripting. Good optimization. Full compatibility with vanilla features. Bug free. For example I'm reluctant as for using mods signed as (pre-)alpha/beta/wip beeing still under development, especially to bound my work with such mods, and some seem to be eternal "early access". The above is necessary, although of course not sufficient, then comes whole aesthetics/features aspect. 

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Naval assets are absolutely not out of scope of this game. BI stated in response to some regarding Arma 3 as "Military Sim", and branding it instead as, "Large Combined Arms Military Sandbox". They're not wrong. It's absolutely not a sim. While it's close, combined arms is more accurate, with an infantry focus? That's good. This in fact makes more sense to have Naval assets in the scope of that title. Let me elaborate.

 

So right now, you have a few infantry. What can you do? Not much. Run, shoot. That's fine. It will take you an hour to swim across from island to islands though. Sure we have helicopters, and attack helicopters, and gunships now with Apex. But there's still so much water, as well as ports, with nothing in the combined arms role to fill them with. Sure we have Speedboat Minigun, new Water Scooter (that handles extremely weird i might add, probably still place holder TBO), and RHIB, which goes fast. But think about this, we have two major military factions at play without a single Maritime unit? I'm not talking about big ships, because that IS out of scope. What we need are boats that infantry can use to complete tasks that without other assets would otherwise be impossible to accomplish. I've proven it already, Naval assets would only benefit the game and extend it's lifespan, and to be honest, BI don't even have plans beyond DayZ right now, and constant Arma 3 updates. After playing Apex for awhile i've come to find it's great, except for when i reach the coast and the big docks. Nothing there. So if big ships are out of scope, and then what is in scope?

 

Ships big enough to be in scope! It's obvious. BI know how big they can make a vehicle like that and make it balanced. There are also new features that they can use that would make game-play more fluid, such as Vehicle transport ships. LSV's can't cross the water on it's own. VTOLS, sure, but if we don't have those on a server, a water solution makes more sense. Also, there's no MBT's or APC's with APEX. So why not add in the Water equivalent to such assets? NATO sure as hell would use them in the event of a conflict in geography such as Tanoa. So would CSAT (theoretically, because every nation always competes with equal or just better equipment these days). I don't think i need to mention what kind of boats would fit in, we already know though, (CB90, Raptor Patrol Boat, Small Landing Craft, Jurmo Land Craft, Nemo Patrol Boat, CCB patrol boat) there's a large variety that anyone looking for naval combat can choose from.

 

Heck, Naval Logistics was, and still is possible without event the addition of new new VVT (Vehicle in Vehicle Transport) they added with Apex. Physix handled it perfectly. But now that VVT is in, it'll just mean a more arcade version of it, AKA, you pulling sharp turns at high speed yield no penalty to the cargo. But all in all, Naval assets? They would only benefit infantry gameplay, greatly to be honest.

[en3x 209]

My little add on to conversation.Last night I connected for the first time on Tanoa on Invade and annex game mode which is

coop with over 50 people.Since I'm tank nut I wanted to grab Marshall/Slammer and go play alongside infantry.Well too bad

because Area Operation was on the island.15 minutes later AO spawns on mainland.When AO ended myself and crewmate

ended up discussion how much sucks that we can't get to the island with next objective because we don't have transport option.

Shortly after that I disconnected.

 

Transport and logistic in backbone or lifeline of any army.The fact that tanoa is island with plenty of islands solidify importance of

transport.So instead of making another pair of UAV which if I may say are very specialized, a transport boat for vehicles would see

more use than already existing uav set.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Proof! No mods (except ASDG's MKVSOC boat of course, it's pretty much Arma 3 Quality)

 

[Rich_R 1087]

I have to imagine if BI released a 'Naval Warfare Pack' DLC the community would be all over it, not just for Tanoa but for several maps, official or otherwise.BI are free to run with this idea and I'm will to forgo any royalties :D

 

Understanding anything to do with modding is time-consuming for Arma 3, IMO opinion they should take the next few months to improve on assets available to modders and the community. This would include the tools and framework needed to produce movable sea-going vessels.

 

Further, they should create a complete and central library of quality templates we can use to retexture in-game assets, including the most recent. We don't need the PBOs unlocked, just the needed lines of code. I know we have some official ones as well as a host of community created textures, but one, concise quality library would speak volumes about BI's support for the modding community.

 

These shouldn't be taken as complaints, rather suggestions :)

[BunnyLord 0]

They should really hire these mod makers like RHS or FFAA to make an official Naval DLC that should be at most 5 dollars because water combat should have been in the beginning of APEX.

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

They should really hire these mod makers like RHS or FFAA to make an official Naval DLC that should be at most 5 dollars because water combat should have been in the beginning of APEX.

5 dollars? Are you aware of the amount of stuff that's inside RHS or FFAA?

 

Cheers

[lexx 1363]

He didn't write hire RHS or FFA and use all their content.

 

5 dollars is highly unrealistic, by the way.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Or, BI could just develop their own high quality Naval assets with feedback from the community in order to improve and fill a massive gap in gameplay since Altis and Stratis were released.

 

5 Ships? Fair?

 

-AAF Patrol Boat (with capability to VVT one small boat or Water Scooter, AAF don't need transport ship due to land mass being whole)

-NATO Up Armed medium Speed Patrol Boat (AA/AT and NEMO Variant, ability to VVT one Water Scooter)

-NATO Transport Boat (VVT compatibility)

-CSAT Up Armored medium Speed Patrol Boat (AA/AT Variant, ability to VVT one water Scooter)

-CSAT Landing Craft (VVT Compatibility)

(nothing for Tanoa besides re skins, because BI already killed the dream of Tanoa having their own procurement's of the sorts.  :wacko: )

 

(They also wouldn't have to model a new turret for the CSAT Patrol boats, because the one on the Kamysh would fit perfectly.)

 

Price, about the same as Heli, and Marksman DLC would suffice, as those two DLC's were the same. Or they can give it to us free, but you know, i wouldn't mind paying BI for their future projects through something like this.

 

Features? Just an emphasis on expanding Gameplay evenly across All Official Terrains, and modded ones alike, as well as providing a more expanded use of the new VVT (vehicle in vehicle) transport system into Vanilla aspect, with small/medium Landing craft/Transport ships improving logistics at the ground/sea level. AA/AT equipped boats could provide more of a challenge to helicopters that currently easily get from place to another.

 

To sum it up, this would fill the gap, and make gameplay SO much more fun.

[road runner 4344]

considering there's Naval packs being worked on, if you look at the stuff by SRBKnight

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

considering there's Naval packs being worked on, if you look at the stuff by SRBKnight

We're not interested in Cruisers and Frigates/Destroyers, per say. Those would add to the niche that we all know BI will never put into the Vanilla game, it simply isn't something they're interested in having out of the package. But it's more things the size of Urals, APC's, stuff like that that add to the gameplay in a certain way. I think those types of things will always be the something modders will take on, which is great. But realistically from a gameplay standpoint, I think simply Heavy Patrol boats with 20/30mm AT/AA versions, kinda like fast water APC's, fast AT/AA units only capable of using water ways, would introduce that threat Tanks and APC's had, but on water, in a limited, but still useful fashion, for many game modes. As well as a transport ship for both teams and then you have a full spectrum of things that would help infantry gameplay with island to island tactics being used in interesting ways.

[chompster 29]

Um, I'm thankful for all the modders out there. But only a very small percentage of mods equal the quality BI puts out*. Just look at BI's AKs, you can even see the selector switch moving as you toggle it. Not only that, the model is highly optimized, balanced, and generally far more thought in it besides making it just eye candy. Modders only have 3-4 things to think about when putting a mod in. Developers have 100's. Also keep in mind several models come from sites such as Turbosquid meaning the modder just has to port it. I don't think it's a bad thing since it saves a huge amount of time. But it's not like they're making it from scratch either.

*To clarify on my meaning, quality doesn't necessary mean "look good, and functional" it means quality both from a consumers and developer standpoint. 

Just wann jump in real quick and point out that those AKs you're praising Bi so much for, are(aside from the AK12) from Dayz. Same with the RPG and the M249. They didn't make those(well technically Dayz team is still Bi... just not arma Bi).

[bonchie 39]

Really awesome video above

 

 

Nice video, but being part of a group that uses all those mod maps, none of them are on the level of Tanoa and many are butt ugly in comparison. BI really has raised the bar with Tanoa.

[lexx 1363]

^ the video above is hella meh. Besides, the title says "Modded Discussion" and then one guy goes on, talking alone for 11 minutes. That's hardly a discussion. His arguments are kinda weak too at times.

Just wann jump in real quick and point out that those AKs you're praising Bi so much for, are(aside from the AK12) from Dayz. Same with the RPG and the M249. They didn't make those(well technically Dayz team is still Bi... just not arma Bi).

It's official content, and it shows. That's the point.

[silentghoust 132]

We're not interested in Cruisers and Frigates/Destroyers, per say. Those would add to the niche that we all know BI will never put into the Vanilla game, it simply isn't something they're interested in having out of the package. But it's more things the size of Urals, APC's, stuff like that that add to the gameplay in a certain way. I think those types of things will always be the something modders will take on, which is great. But realistically from a gameplay standpoint, I think simply Heavy Patrol boats with 20/30mm AT/AA versions, kinda like fast water APC's, fast AT/AA units only capable of using water ways, would introduce that threat Tanks and APC's had, but on water, in a limited, but still useful fashion, for many game modes. As well as a transport ship for both teams and then you have a full spectrum of things that would help infantry gameplay with island to island tactics being used in interesting ways.

I agree with this 100% I would throw another $20 down for DLC boats if it met getting more specialized naval assets. Several countries of CSAT have many specialized patrol boats that have things like motars, and even AA launchers.

[nodunit 397]

Really awesome video above

Not so awesome really, as mentioned above, this video contains one voice and isn't a discussion, so we don't get to talk about the cons of addons and mod reliance.

Firstly yes addons and mods can offer a LOT of content and in some cases unprecidentedly so in what they can do..BUT we must consider how much of this content is ported, Arma 1's samples were opened a long time ago and to this day its vehicles are still making their way into Arma 3.   Secondly is the time disparity, consider how many years it takes for some of the biggest addons and mods to come out. 

It is so easy to look at something released and say "See guys we can just use mods" but it really should be considered how long it took for that to come around, there are mods that have been released for arma 3 that were being propped up since Arma1.

For example the BRDM2 from arma 1, the Mi-24, Mi-8 from Arma 2, the list goes on, we would not have this content if BI did not release the assets for free and we would not have a lot of the content we do today.

Secondly addon/mod creators don't play by the same rules, we make our content to please ourselves, this means we don't have ETA's, we don't have to fix things when they break, and we don't have to give a rats about how well it runs on someones computer, all of that comes as a nicety, whereas game content MUST perform within a certain standard.  In some cases this places the dice in our court as it allows us to get away with things which BI cannot due to their own rules as mentioned since development of arma 3 alpha.

And thirdly, the idea of "hey guys lets not buy things because the community offers more content" is a very very dangerous mindset. 

That is precisely the kind of thinking that would lead other developers to reconsider mod tools and has done so in the past, afterall if someone else can offer to people for free what they would otherwise have to pay for then that makes them a threat.

Also he praises the operation arrowhead expansion on its content, operation arrowhead cost full price same as the original game and used much of the same content from arma 2 while adding more, but BI said from the get go that for most assets they did NOT want to reuse previous Arma assets, and it shows when we look at ported content beside current.

tldr;  saying to not pay for expansions cause the community can offer more content endangers modding, a lot of the content we have now would not be possible if BI didn't release Arma 1 and 2 assets unbinarized, and addon/mod creators don't have deadlines, don't have to ensure their stuff works as close to 100%, do not have deadline ie "When its done" which can become "if it gets done."

[frankfranconi 24]

I just really hope that vanilla vehicle-in-vehicle functionality is added to more vehicles we already have. Just think of the Mk. V SOC craft that is in RHS right now, which can already transport smaller vehicles (though not well, because there is no way to fix the load).

 

Looking at the biki, it doesn't seem like too much work either. As far as I understand, it's just about creating some memory points on the model and adding them to the configuration.

[PuFu 4600]

Because that vid talks about RHS, and because i have worked for BI still do for RHS, i'll get my 2 cents in:

1. the amount of content in RHS has been made in quite a few years, a lot of the vehicles have been started back in A2 days, and while a lot have been upgraded for A3, the base meshes are the same (mainly russian side, us side is all brand new for A3)

2. the so called "ported content" from A2 has suffered a lot of upgrades, but the base meshes are BIs. We do have plans to upgrade and replace most of it either way, but that takes time, lots of it.

3. we do not have deadlines. Or in fact we do, but these deadlines are our and only ours to set (both in terms of content that we plan doing and dates)

4. The continuous support we provide is because we choose to do it. Other mod groups and mod makers choose to do it differently and it is their prerogatives

5. We have our own workflows and standards, mostly based on the ones BI have as well (we have quite a few members who work or have worked with BI before). that said, we can choose to push the envelope a bit more than they can (both in terms of features and models) because we have a different kind of freedom in terms of how we develop things

 

What a lot of people fail to understand is the amount of time and work that went into Tanoa and the amount of assets that ones gets with the island. The island for all BI games, since A2 at least, is the crown jewel for every release. A lot of the resources went into it and i'd say it shows.

 

BI is well aware that the modding community creates a lot of custom content (don't wanna sound like a cocky ass here, but a lot of the content made by a lot of addon makers, RHS included, are up to BI standards if not above in terms of detail, animations, optimization etc = overall quality). When it comes to islands assets and islands by themselves, no offence here but none of the community made ones gets close to BI's quality, reason is most terrain makers don't create their own custom assets to fit their own islands

 

In short: the modding community would be a lot less productive without BI being what they are, and there should be no direct comparison between DLC and expansion content and modded ones. Also, from an user perspective, do understand that you are the lucky one, because you receive a lot for free, a lot of the content that would otherwise be paid in other games.

 

By supporting BI and buying their DLC and Expansions, you also support the addon makers and all the creative people within this very community. Things are related and inter-connected, and the line between addon developer and BI developer is thinner than some of you expect anyways.

[road runner 4344]

Well said PuFu.

[General Kong 148]

Well said Indeed