Tanks DLC Feedback

[R3vo 2654]

Haven't read through the whole thread, but here are my personal wishes:

1. Overhauled armour configuration
2. Overhauled suspension and engine behaviour
3. New sounds (See second video in the first post, and this post https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/196366-tanks-dlc-feedback/page-2#entry3107779)
4. 3D Interiour for drivers (With interactive elements), right now, driving a tank is boring
5. Advanced defense technologies against incoming fire
6. Better visuals for tracks and particles e.g, dirt spraying of the tracks, dust cloud when firing etc.
7. Different armour and weapon attachments for tanks (maybe selectable via the  Virtual Garage) http://www.panzerbaer.de/types/pix/bw_kpz_leopard_2a5_pso-IMG_5789i.jpg
8. Better visual representation of damage. Right now, tracks are not broken when hit and they still more
9. Realistic turning speeds for the turrets. It's way too fast currently

 

A source for ideas can be found here:

 

http://www.kmweg.com/home/tracked-vehicles/main-battle-tanks/leopard-2-a7/product-information.html

[x3kj 1247]

the driving physics looks great, hope bi, can offer somethings similar. 

imagine arma with the unigne engine ...

1) Arma engine is unique. There is nothing like it.

2) The "physics" in that video are crap. It just standard "bouncy spring" that nearly every other game with some sort of physics has... Current drive system in A3 is alot better than that. And even that is not "good enough" (also, glitches).

 

SOUND DESIGN

There have been some major improvements to the sound design in Arma 3 but i think vehicles have been largely overlooked. Tanks need to be loud and imposing on infantry around them, check out the Abrams modeled in RHS:USAF if you want to experience really immersive vehicle sound design. Bonus points if different tanks can be identified by their sounds! A screaming gas turbine tank is basically what i'm asking for :D.

RHS Abrams uses Arma 2 sounds for the gas engines as far as i know... it sounds really choppy (due to the technique and low number of samples in A2). Not sure if THAT is what you mean by impressive?

[Damian90 697]

 

 

RHS Abrams uses Arma 2 sounds for the gas engines as far as i know... it sounds really choppy (due to the technique and low number of samples in A2). Not sure if THAT is what you mean by impressive? 

 

RHS does not use ArmA2 sounds, it's a completely new sound, however there are problems with gas turbine engines in the game, because they are based on transmission configs and how gears are shifting. 

[Kydoimos 916]

In addition to X3kj's awesome overview of some current issues, I just wanted to mention a waypoint option to allow tanks to stay on roads even in combat situations. Sometimes, for a particular scenario, it's not always desirable to have a tank go offroad when being engaged by small arms fire. In the past, I've had to add a whole new config entry with preferRoads ​enabled. Of course, this would also be good for convoys, that include tanks :)

[sammael 366]

everything is simple

no futuristic or near futuristic tanks

only real tanks copy but with fictional names (license trick)

[Damian90 697]

everything is simple

no futuristic or near futuristic tanks

only real tanks copy but with fictional names (license trick)

 

This license trick is not needed actually. There is no such thing as copyrighting in case of military designation codes and codenames. This is why BI in reality doesn't needed to name Leopard 2A4 as MBT-52 Kuma, Merkava Mk4M as M2A1 Slammer or Object 640 as T-100. ;)

[sammael 366]

BI read all this feedbacks and then will make Invisible Tank  :D

[redken 20]

1. Improving the FCS

• Hunter-Killer mode for Commander
• Gunner Sight view for the Commander
• Dynamic Lead for moving Targets
• Mouse control like in Steel Beasts Pro PE
• Better Thermal Sights(contrast)

2. Better Armor/Penetration System

 

3. Active Protection Systems:

• Soft Kill: MUSS, Shtora, Laser Warning
• Hard Kill: Trophy, Iron Fist, ARENA, LEDS, AMAP-ADS

With different modes: Automatic, Semi-automatic, Off

 

4. 3D Interior with Periscopes

 

5. Modern Tank HE-Ammo

• Rheinmetall DM11
• IMI APAM-MP-T
• Orbital ATK AMP

With different Fire modes: Impact, Time Delay, Airburst

 

5a. Modern IFV HE-Ammo:

• Rheinmetall KETF/AHEAD
• CTA International GPR-AB-T
• Bofors 40mm 3P
• Orbital ATK 30mm PABM-T

With different Fire modes: Impact, Time Delay, Airburst

 

ATGM with different Fire modes: Direct Attack, Top Attack, Fire and Observe

 

6. Improving the Tank AI

[borch 11]

Hi :)

 

DRIVER (DVR)

 

1. Like mentioned earlier, manual gear selection.

2. A "multi-function display system"(MFD) (for the Gunner (GNR) and Tank Commandet (TC) too) through which the crew can share views from diferent cameras and sights of the tank.

 Exemples:
a) Simply displaying the view of the front DVR camera (like in M2A3 BFV or Stryker ICV).
 DVR can use a camera mounted on the rear of the hull (like on Leopard2.../MBT Revolution/ Kuma).
c) While moving from turret down to hull down or from hull down to turret down position DVR will to look through the gunner's primary sight (GPS), to know when to stop.
d) If more cameras are present, for exemple side cameras, DVR (and other crew members) are able to display their views.
e) Checks the state of tank's systems

 

TANK COMMANDER (TC)

 

1. Proper hunter-killer system. The new Fire Control System (FCS) is doing quite well, but it's still not it. I'll take a Leopard 2 tank as exemple. TC have the ability to override the turret using the commander's sight (in this case PERI), or using the gunner's sight. He can also slave its PERI to the turret, so the PERI aims at the same point as GNR. These operations should be done by clicking one button. I know that there were some issues with this, especialy in multiplayer. That's why, now there are only little markers which show to GNR and TC where the other one is aiming. The hunter-killer system can be done by "MFD system" (I mean that in older tanks hunter-killer was performed by different means. For exemple in M1 tanks by gunner's Primary Sight Extension. 

 

 

Nowadays (with german PUMA APC, or russian T-14 tank) all of the tank displays are "standardized").

 

 

2. MFD system. Here's a photo of the combat compartment of the MBT Revolution/ Kuma. On the foreground we can see  the TC station with two MFDs on which TC displays the view from the commander's sight, from the CROWS, from the Battle Management System (BMS (in ARMA simply the map. The map works fine as a BMS)), or he checks the status of the vechicle (ammo, state of tank's systems...same for the DVR). On the background we can see the GNR station. The middle double ocular is the EMES sight (GPS). To its left is the GNR auxiliary sight (GAS). Forward and down of the EMES oculars we've got a MFD.

 

 

4. The ability to use the Commander's Sight (PERI/CITV) or CROWS (if present) when needed. The "CITV" has manual and automatic scan modes. CROWS features programmable target reference points for multiple locations, programmable sector surveillance scanning, automatic target ballistic lead, automatic target tracking, and programmable no-fire zones.

 

5. To enforce "battle with open hatches", like in real life, there should be implemented a two stage "turn out". First where only the head shows off the hatch to observe the terrain by eye or binoculars. Second which would like the one present in game for no direct threat situations.

 

GUNNER (GNR)

 

1. MFD...

 

 

http://s1105.photobucket.com/user/buglerbilly/media/150624%20Puma_Interior_zpsxitxfpfk.jpg.html

 

2. Hunter-killer system. The gunner can use the comander's sight for engaging targets throught MFD, once the GPS is damaged.

 

3. Ballistic computer augmentation. Entering Battlesight ranges already present. (((Enter wind speed, air and ammunition temperature, gun barrel wear...)))

 

4. 

 

 

The biggest issue is turret control, how it should be solved? Again good example is Steel Beasts, where turret follow the cursor, so the player does not need to move mouse much, and the turret movement itself is more stable, soft if you get me.

 

OTHERS

 

1. More hit points, like Gunner's Primary Sight, Gunner's Auxiliary Sight, PERI/CITV-Commanders independet thermal viewer= Commanders sight,, antenas, Auxiliary Power Unit, CROWS...

 

2. Mine plow and mine roller. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3n0dTn6tLk

 

 

 

 

3. New vechicle inventory and tank ammunition. I imagine three slots for a vechicle, like for infantry: suit, vest, backpack. These slost are: primary ammunition compartment, secondary ammunition compartment, storage boxes for crew equipment (food, water, medicaments, clothing ect...). 

 

 

In this case gun rounds, MG ammo belts, smoke grenades for tank smoke dischargers would be just as  carbine mags for infantry. For exemple, a Leopard's 2 primary ammunition compatment have a capacity of 15 rounds, so you can store 15 rounds inside, of differnet type: APFSDS, APDS, HE, HEAT, MP-HEAT, HESH, HEP, HEF, Canister, WP, ATGM (exemple: 9M11M Refleks...). So, for a counter insurgency mission you'll take full HEAT, HE, HEF, MP-HEAT load. For a mission on a conventional battlefield you'll take 60% APFSDS and 40% HEAT...ect. 

 

http://s1383.photobucket.com/user/borch2000/media/arma3%20tank%20dlc%20ammunition%20compartment_zpsadrsxdqt.png.html

 

The tank should not be able to fire rounds from the secondary ammunition compartment until they are loaded into the primary ammunition compartment. In Leopard 2 it is done by the Loader itself, with the turret facing backwards (+-5 o'clock), the APU and Engine off, Thermal Imaging System (TIS) getting warm).

[x3kj 1247]

yes please spam even larger pictures, because we dont know how tanks look... jeez

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

A futuristic version of the M1A2 like the M5A2 Schwarzkopf from EndWar would be cool.

[R3vo 2654]

Am I the only one who would like to see an older tank like a M60A3 for rebel forces? Right now we have to use CUP or similar to give insurgents an armoured vehicle.

[angel24marin 34]

Am I the only one who would like to see an older tank like a M60A3 for rebel forces? Right now we have to use CUP or similar to give insurgents an armoured vehicle.

A FIA M60, may with some upgrade kit like the ones that Israel use, look appropriate IMO.

CSAT should get the Armata or a Chinese tank with active protection system

OTAN IMO will be fine if it only receive more variants of the actual vehicles. (Marshall with 105mm gun and bird cage armour/reactive armour, Panther with autocannon, Hunter with Titan missiles, variants with active armour(ex: trophy)...)

Also is key inhibitor sistems against ATGMs. That disrupt the tracking system and spot the direction of the laser guidance.

And a more visual distinction when you hit ERA.

[twistking 204]

i would also like some of the available vehicles (APCs, MRAPs) with other / without wepon systems and FFV available. A MRAP without a turret but with a shoulder-launcher-capable FFV could make an interesting light threat for tanks. Same with the APCs. I could imagine the Csat Marid, the Nato Panther and the Greenfor Gorgon without the remote controlled station, but with an unprotected mashine gun on top and 2 FFV positions from back hatches that allow for shoulder-launched missiles like titan and RPGs...

[xxgetbuck123 945]

i would also like some of the available vehicles (APCs, MRAPs) with other / without wepon systems and FFV available. A MRAP without a turret but with a shoulder-launcher-capable FFV could make an interesting light threat for tanks. Same with the APCs. I could imagine the Csat Marid, the Nato Panther and the Greenfor Gorgon without the remote controlled station, but with an unprotected mashine gun on top and 2 FFV positions from back hatches that allow for shoulder-launched missiles like titan and RPGs...

 

So to sum it up, pretty much have the Stryker variants fused into the current vanilla vehicles? Could have a Mortar Gorgon, AA Gorgon etc etc.. I like the idea. 

[nodunit 397]

Fun as the idea of fully 3D interiors are they come with a huge caveat of issues, anyone who has built one knows that it comes with two massive obstacles from the front-

References and time to build.

If you can make it past the first two then you have to consider how useful it is really, a fully interactive one sure I could see some point in that because you're interacting with the knobs and switches,  but does it really add or take away?  
Would you honestly take a tank with a smaller viewscreen for the gun in trade for an interior or would you rather just skip to optics and get a better view?

[andersson 285]

As a user I would prefer interiors and optics, just like in OFP.

[R3vo 2654]

Fun as the idea of fully 3D interiors are they come with a huge caveat of issues, anyone who has built one knows that it comes with two massive obstacles from the front-

References and time to build.

If you can make it past the first two then you have to consider how useful it is really, a fully interactive one sure I could see some point in that because you're interacting with the knobs and switches,  but does it really add or take away?  

Would you honestly take a tank with a smaller viewscreen for the gun in trade for an interior or would you rather just skip to optics and get a better view?

 

I cannot really imagen how much work it is, but since I usually expect some high quality models and textures I'd be fine if only the driver gets a 3D interior with some interactive elements. The gunner and commander will be using the optics anyway most of the times.

 

The time modeling the inside should be spent on modeling the outside with a few more details (Example)

 

On another note, since BIS is monitoring this thread for ideas. Here's is very good video of some tanks firing and I'd love to see some of those particle effects (smoking barrel, dust clouds etc.) to be added to the game

 

[instagoat 133]

I think there are a lot of good suggestions, but there's a few fundamentals that need to be addressed before anything else I think. I would prefer any two of these over modelled interiors, to be honest.

 

1: Realistic effect of Ground upon vehicles and realistic effect of Weight and Momentum. Reduced speed and bad ride off-road (OFP did this better than any of the Arma parts! Take a Lada offroad and you'll see what I mean.) in particular! No more 110 kph T-100s drifting through the countryside. Refer as inspiration to tank movement in Steel Armor: Blaze of War.

 

2: Physics Issues that cause vehicles, in particular tanks, to fly into the sky, be flung sideways across the map, flip over and/or get stuck.

 

3: No more hitpoints, with discrete Internal module damage and realistic simulation of Armor (as far as reasonably possible. Ie, abstract armour types such as: 1st gen Composite (T-64), 2nd gen composite (Challenger 1, M1 Abrams, 3rd gen Composite (M1A1, Merkava) as well as layers. As for module and armor damage, refer as inspiration to Warthunders damage system here:

 

4: Detailed control over movement speeds. All advanced bells and whistles are useless if you can't order AI around at very slow speeds (walking pace as the slowest speed, to slowly creep up on building corners and hilltops, with five increments instead of the current three.). If not for SP, then for the AI themselves to use in cooperative battles.

[silentghoust 132]

Couple of my thoughts on the upcoming DLC

• I would like to point out that modern APFSDS round won't typically "deflect" like some people seem to think. Even a glancing hit is going to dig in to the armor to some degree rather then simply bounce off like old WWII solid kinetic rounds. 
• The current damage model probably won't get overhauled but I can see some changes, such as better crew damage simulation. Maybe even specializing the hit points so they mean different things to the game "tracks vs a ammo storage for example"
• I use to be part of the interior crowd for tanks for a long time. Then I realized aside from checking if your buddy next to you is dead, it's kinda meh.
• I'm willing to bet a copy of that tank DLC that they will add amphibious abilities to tracked assets.
• I'm sure will see a drastic improvement of the AI by the time we hit this roadmap when it comes to driving armor.

[CyclonicTuna 87]

The only thing I could really ask of the Tanks DLC is more detailled interiors for armored vehicles and more PIP functionality to go along with those interiors. Also I'd be nice to see character animations for getting in and out of the vehicles like what we see in the A-164 Wipeout. 

Other than that the thing that really needs fixing is the AI pathfinding for vehicles. Infact I think the AI pathfinding overall needs to be fixed. 

[CyclonicTuna 87]

The only thing I could really ask of the Tanks DLC is more detailled interiors for armored vehicles and more PIP functionality to go along with those interiors. Also I'd be nice to see character animations for getting in and out of the vehicles like what we see in the A-164 Wipeout. 

Other than that the thing that really needs fixing is the AI pathfinding for vehicles. Infact I think the AI pathfinding overall needs to be fixed. 

[GamerOnkel 100]

Amphibious chain vehicles are still missing in arma 3

 

And there are missing female tanks crew ;) :D :D

[R3vo 2654]

4: Detailed control over movement speeds. All advanced bells and whistles are useless if you can't order AI around at very slow speeds (walking pace as the slowest speed, to slowly creep up on building corners and hilltops, with five increments instead of the current three.). If not for SP, then for the AI themselves to use in cooperative battles.

 

Very good point. Something like a speed limiter and a corresponding commands for AI would be very nice.

[petek 62]

Really good news with the roadmap BIS - and of course that you're checking in on this thread for input!

Is it possible to get a steer on the direction of the tanks DLC? Is it purely tanks additional content and features / "tracked" vehicles generally etc.... I'd like to see some love and additional versions of existing wheeled content but unsure if in scope (additonal variations of MRAPs, light strike ec...)

 

Cheers