Tanks DLC Feedback

[filler 15]

its new tank for dlc

[filler 15]

ЗдравÑтвуйте,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-14_Armata

Ðовые роÑÑийÑкие танки Т-14

https://youtu.be/X2iANCObfHs

https://youtu.be/TQLG0bOy7SY

новый

 

Панцирь-С1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantsir-S1-S2

новый

 

БМПТ Терминатор

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMPT_Terminator

[hellfish6 7]

Hi. I really like the ideas thrown in so far. I have nothing to add about specific functionality, given that I'm not a modder and haven't touched a config in many years. However, there are some interesting developments in armored vehicle technology in the works - things like on-board UAVs in vehicles (sometimes gun launched, sometimes thrown by the commander out of his cupola), vehicle data networks (like Blue Force Tracker - I imagine a small toggled minimap for the crew?), thermal-reducing camouflage (mostly in camo net form now, but potentially in paint and adaptive electric armor), active protection systems (electronic or physical), and band tracks (basically reinforced rubber for a quieter ride). Useful interior views (not 3D interiors, mind you, but a driver first-person view with maybe a moving map, rear-view camera and system damage indicator in some of the black space around the view port) would be pretty helpful for those who don't often play with third person view.

 

Hopefully this DLC will allow or introduce advanced features for tanks/armored vehicles like the helicopter DLC introduced advanced flight models.And if you're looking for a tank to model, I've always had a soft spot for the M8 Thunderbolt variant with the electric drive and 120mm gun. ;)

 

http://tanknutdave.com/m8-thunderbolt-armored-gun-system/

[arma131 9]

Honestly I would be overjoyed if they just fixed what has been already provided. Physx and AI predominantly.

 

Any battle with AI tanks is a no go with them unable to drive or fight without ruining the player's immersion.

There is no fun in watching AI tanks run over their own or having their vulnerable rear constantly exposed.  

[mad_cheese 593]

May have been mentioned before but I'd like to suggest that this is a good time to fix the old AI issue where AI-Tank-Drivers do not cope well with units standing closer to 10m behind them.

 

Also I suppose that the new driving could find it's way to tanks in time? 

[Sanya 97]

Necessary improvements it is window periscopes and properly functioning embrasure for passenger seats in APC. 

[pierre MGI 10]

AIs selecting efficient ammo against infantry or vehicles. Here is my 2 cent contribution. Not only for DLC but for every tank. This could be nice if something like this script could be in Arma's engine. Sure, you can improve it.

[DancZer 65]

Visual:

• 3D Periscopes on all stations. Modelling the entire Interior of a Tank is extremely time consuming and the small benefit to gameplay vs. the work is prohibitive. Modelling just the Viewports/Periscopes will have the same effect: provide more situational awareness and also immersion, while beeing very easy to do. It was done somewhat comparably for M113 driver and Bradley driver in A2. The idea behind this can be applied to commander and gunner too and can be demonstrated with these concept images: one two. I demonstrated the implementation in one of my WIP videos @2:32 (Commander of a Battletank)  and @6:31 to 7:55 (different tank). These are fantasy vehicles, their periscope designs are pretty terrible (narrow). However, thats still better than current "always glued to the optic" implementation of vanilla A3. There are issues that prevent this method from beeing implemented properly. The Commander View LOD is not functional, so if the Vehicle has Gunner, Driver, Commander and Passengers, not all can be modelled this way. Also, the Shadow LOD for Gunner View, Driver View, Cargo View, Commander View do not appear to be working. I tried everything, but the main default shadow LOD was always used.

 

I really like this WIP at 2:32. They sould definitely do something like this. Maybe a little more professional with some details around the windows and the gadgets. To feel it a bit more authentic. The rest of the GUI can be black to save time. It's not a modelling contest. :) Rather have views like this for all possible slots.

[Vojtechsonik 34]

What mod is that?

[HaseDesTodes 62]

I didn't have the endurance to read through more than the first page, so i'll just share what i thought of that could fit in:

1: better vison for drivers. doesn't have to be modeled interieur, having some kind of free look for the camera or difernt camers to swich to (using numpad freelook)

2. better damage models as frequently requested

3. improving tanks is good, but how about some AT improvements?

 so if we got beter damage models, why don't we get top down, attacks for missiles like Titan AT, or that NLAW firemode where the missiles flys over the top of a tank and explodes there for the pcml

maybe we could also get options to stick explosives to a tank hull without scripting

4. fire from vehicle positions for tanks/apcs where the infantry just mounts on top of the vehicle, just like it's already in RHS

5. improved countermeasures against missiles

[R3vo 2654]

3. improving tanks is good, but how about some AT improvements?
 so if we got beter damage models, why don't we get top down, attacks for missiles like Titan AT, or that NLAW firemode where the missiles flys over the top of a tank and explodes there for the pcml
maybe we could also get options to stick explosives to a tank hull without scripting

This is a very important point. At least the option to switch to top down would be very welcome and since many mods added this already, it can't be to difficult for the devs.

[dragon01 902]

Exactly. IMO, the "firemode" key should do that, instead of switching you back to the rifle. You can switch modes on the rifles, so why not on AT launchers?

[metalcraze 290]

I want present day MBTs, not this futuristic nonsense.

 

Funny that, Merkava 4 in 2035 is armed with a 105mm gun that became outdated half a century prior to game's events

[twistking 204]

3. improving tanks is good, but how about some AT improvements?
 so if we got beter damage models, why don't we get top down, attacks for missiles like Titan AT, or that NLAW firemode where the missiles flys over the top of a tank and explodes there for the pcml
maybe we could also get options to stick explosives to a tank hull without scripting

This is a very important point. At least the option to switch to top down would be very welcome and since many mods added this already, it can't be to difficult for the devs.

 

 

We also need proper simulation of the NLAW intertia guidance. I can't believe that the current system is still in place. It's neither realistic, nor is it beneficial to gameplay. From my understanding, the tech for missile inertia guidance should be - more or less - in place since the last major update (lead calculation basically). With the current system the NLAW is just a free vehicle kill... boring!

[RealPanzer123 4]

Hello,

 

I have read this whole thread and all the things that need fixing have been mentioned as far as I can see and so I will not repeat them here.

 

What I would like to see added is an easy to use graphical interface for modding vehicles by adding skins, sounds, effects and characteristics. At the moment we have the make a pbo system that is long winded and complex and could be replaced with a more user-friendly system. Over time things change and so there could be a way of simply inputting things like turret turn speeds, vehicle speeds, weapon changes, ammo loadouts, reload times, weight, spare parts....

 

This would allow tank experts/enthusiasts to configure their tank performance on how they feel they should be based on usage and experience rather than the opinion of a teenage game developer who does tanks one day and zombies the next and the week after a farm simulator, and whose heart is not really set on tanks.

 

There are a lot of people who would gladly do a lot of expert tank modding for free and for fun if they were not locked out by how hard it is to do.

 

Giving the tank development crew at the Red Hammer Studios, a contract to do this work on behalf of BI would be a good idea. There are some very talented people there who are very passionate about getting the tanks exactly how they should be and who would not be watching the clock while working but instead burning the midnight oil to get it done and done right. Always do more than you are paid to do and it is not long before you are paid for what you do.

 

 

Thanks

 

Alan

[mickeymen 324]

Hi, BIS sitrep # 00179 you offer, shares his thoughts about the DLC Tanks.

this is definitely good news, some thoughts about this:

 

=============================================================================================================

Unfortunately, each new DLC adds a lot of bugs in the game. My experience shows it to me.

As seems to me, BIS you should not accumulate errors, you need to reduce their number. 

As seems to me, only correcting old issues would be more logical to start the Tanks DLC.

 

Old bugs, which should be fixed before Tanks DLC:

1. You must find the cause from which the tanks in the Arma3 suddenly jump up. 

This issue - https://feedback.bistudio.com/T117728 - is long time ignored . Please finally check out this ticket. The man who created the question asks you for the umpteenth time. But you ignore, ignore, ignore this man.This is not looks good, please respect your users greater.

2. You need to teach the AI-drivers to go around the union infantry and not crush them, at least when the vehicle-team located in not danger mode. (a link to this feedback is was not found, but I seen it approximately two years ago and this issue ignored all this time).

3. You need to teach the AI-Drivers to keep distance into current formation and did not collision with the allied tank/armored vehicle in the formation. This issue - https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82457 - is long time ignored.

4. You need to make the decrepit environment objects in way of a tank are destructible. The old barn or a low stone fence must not be able to stop or catch in a trap heavy armored vehicle. This issue - https://feedback.bistudio.com/T81804  and this  https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82601 - also long time are ignored. As seems to me, all environment objects except of large houses and stones, in front of the oncoming tank, should be destroyed. So the player would be better to feel the weight of his heavy vehicle.

5. Tanks should not roll over. All the reasons that cause this nonsenses, must be neutralized.

This issue - https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82457 - is long time ignored.

=============================================================================================================

 

DLC priorities. 

I read a few pages. It is very difficult to add something new to what has been said. 

I fully agree with the desires to interriors, advanced damage models, advanced driving model, special defense abilities, better simulation inside, special AI behavour. This all is cool, but, as seems to me, I have a few points, which as seems to me not mentioned in the previous messages:

 

> Interriors for armor.

I will allow myself to repeat only this item. Because this addition could be the best improvement for ARMA of all times! I think, in the Tanks DLC, it should be hightest priority item. All types of vehicles in A3, for the player, as driver or as gunner, have interiors, only the heavy armor has no interior. Unfortunately it does not look fair. With regards to interiors, I can add, that for this task can be used a special LOD of tank model, which can be created only for work with the player. To improve the performance the vehicles without the player onboard will not have to use it.

 

 > Position changing gunner/commander/driver.

I could not find mention of this before. Changing position in the armor vehicles, should take some time. When creating interiors, this item can be implemented more effectively.

 When player will change your position, as I see it:

 1 First, short animations, player start movement from the current position.

 2. Screen dimming and the player hear sound of movement and sees the status bar of change position.

 3. After some time the Screen lights up and we see the short movement animation (end of changing position) of player to the new position.

 

 > Entering/disembarking.

Entering or disembarking should be improved. This actions also needs to take some time. The boarding/disimbarking of the crew must have a queue and have the correct position. As seems to me, enter or exit positions should have a more exact positions (only near the exit hatch) The boarding or disimbarking from side of track, should not be permitted. For this actions shoud be special points with animations or even status bar.

 

> Collision of main cannon.

The main cannon should collide  with the buildings or other obstacles, at the rotation of the tower. Such a feature would add more realism to tanks gameplay  and complexity in the use of tanks inside the cities.

 

> Advanced Repair model.

I have not found anything about this in the above. Unfortunately, the repair of Arma3, is a real shame. It is simply absent. 

This can be great addition to Tanks DLC.

Player tired to watch this shamefull repair: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh1jiY0w0Lg&feature=youtu.be

I think that creating a DLC Tanks, this item must have the also hight priority.

As I see it. - Each module of vehicle (hull, engine, turret, left/right track, gun and etc) must have a private and personal time to repair and the personal marker to repair-animation. Certain modules, such as a turret or engine must be able to be repaired from the inside from armored vehicle. Each item, could have private time to repair (depending on the skill of the AI or player) and have a status bar of repair.

 

> Support Crew and operations for all support vehicles.

The game has many support vehicles,which can support armor, but any support vehicle in A3 is not has a service personel, no has special actions. Repair/refuel/reload ammunition of armor in A3 happens too arcade. Such actions in the game, which claims to be "simulator", unfortunately seem not good. The creation of the service crews (1-2 engineers) at all support transports and specific steps for their support (repair,refuel,reloading actions and animations), could significantly improve the gameplay and can be great addition to Tanks DLC.

 

Thanks in advance

 

 

 

[hellfish6 7]

I appreciate your point of view, but I think interiors for tanks would be a massive waste of resources. Think of all the time, effort and resources to make something that will not even be used in a fight - they would be entirely cosmetic. Adding functionality to crew positions (moving maps, situational awareness, damage reports, etc.) make sense from a functionality perspective, but can be done with relatively simple UI updates. But modeling interiors to see a bunch of buttons you can't push? Why would you look at that instead of outside of the periscopes or sights? At least in the case of the personnel carriers, the infantry have nothing else to do, so you might as well let them look at each other. But tanks?

[en3x 209]

I think interiors are very beneficial - main argument is getting rid of letterbox view for driver.

 

Lots of people like to game in first person where they enjoy immersion and direct action.

 

With vehicles at current time this is not enjoyable and feels very artificial.

It looks like point of view with overlay on it.

 

Relaying on Quality over Quantity would allow team to produce 2 new tanks with interiors

in my assumption in timely frame.Following delivery of t100, slammer and kuma.

 

That would be in direct opposition to more vehicles with standard letterbox view

and stagnant artificial point of view in First Person.

[mickeymen 324]

I appreciate your point of view, but I think interiors for tanks would be a massive waste of resources. Think of all the time, effort and resources to make something that will not even be used in a fight - they would be entirely cosmetic. Adding functionality to crew positions (moving maps, situational awareness, damage reports, etc.) make sense from a functionality perspective, but can be done with relatively simple UI updates. But modeling interiors to see a bunch of buttons you can't push? Why would you look at that instead of outside of the periscopes or sights? At least in the case of the personnel carriers, the infantry have nothing else to do, so you might as well let them look at each other. But tanks?

Hi, of course I understand the difficulty of such a task. 

Creation of Interiors is a difficult task, but it does not imply full detail of the entire environment. The main objective is to create a feeling of presence within the vehicle. 

Unfortunately today ARMA does not have this effect. Also we already have a interiors for all transport crew in the all armored vehicles and on this background lack of interiors for the commander/gunner/driver, does not look good.

 

I think interiors are very beneficial - main argument is getting rid of letterbox view for driver.

 

Lots of people like to game in first person where they enjoy immersion and direct action.

 

With vehicles at current time this is not enjoyable and feels very artificial.

I agree with you. it is definitely worth the all costs. 

[R3vo 2654]

I think we can all agree that interiors would be very benificial for the way maneuvering a tank feels. However, it should not only be a visual feature, but also add something more to the gameplay e.g, there should be a reason why I would leave the optics and look around the interior. Unfortunately that's going to be quite difficult with the bad PIP inplementation.

 

But they could utilise such an interior in the way it's done for jets and helicopters, e.g, show the damage of the tank, fuel, ammunition, a GPS and so on and so forth...

[mickeymen 324]

However, it should not only be a visual feature, but also add something more to the gameplay e.g, there should be a reason why I would leave the optics and look around the interior. 

 

 

I liked the post of @x3kj on the first page of this thread. He suggested that the implementation of destroyable optics. for you here's can be the reason. 

Then you will be forced to leave the optics and see the interior of the damaged tank and to monitor the situation through observation windows. 

At this moment of gameplay, add to the broken optics smoke in the interior of damaged tank, this can be a fantastic gameplay!

[andersson 285]

I have very immersive fond memory from OFPs SP mission "lone wolf" where I was hiding under a tank while the guard was walking past me, and then when I managed to get into the tank I could sit there and relax a bit looking around inside as I wasnt operating the tank. But as soon as I looked through the optics and moved the turret so the tank came alive the alarm went off.

 

Also in the mission "heavy metal" I could relax from the optics while the tanks were moving towards the area of operation, just looking inside and see the stabilized gun move, at the same time keeping an overview through the small view ports.

 

Sure I truly understand that small things like that might not be worth the big effort of building interiors so I'm not expecting it to happen. But the loss made me stop playing in tanks. I hate being glued to optics all the time, ruins my immersion completely.

But just me make it clear; I do understand why not and that the few like me are not worth the effort for BI. Way to much work that should be spent on other things.

Luckily we got Burnes :) 

[Guest]

Does this mod still have a point with PiP turned off? Doesn't PiP lower perfs?

[andersson 285]

This mod still have a point without pip. The optics still work which is the main thing and you have immersive internals (OFP did it without pip). The pip is crusting on the cace I would say, an addition to immersive internals. I even dare to say that this mod would still have a point without internals as the tanks are really well made.

[swtx 42]

I'm going to make this real simple.

1 Working ARENA system for all CSAT and Russian made Armour varients.

2 Working Reactive Armour for all Western and NATO armour variants.

3 Realistic blow out panels and cook offs for tank ammo storage areas. (Enhancing Crew Survival)

4 Real to life interiors and ability to interact with panels and ballistic computers with your mouse (Kinda Like DCS aircraft interiors)

5 Realistic Armour values for NATO and CSAT Armour variants (legacy rocket propelled anti Armour systems like RPG 7 and RPG 32 will do less damage against modern Reactive Armour)

6 Introduction of the Russian T14 ARMATA to ARMA 3 and the T90 SM.

7. Ability to laze targets for greater accuracy at distances with main gun and coax machine gun
 
8  Introduction of new rocket and round types to defeat modern armour (ie,  STAFF or Smart Target Activated Fire and Forget round for main gun and modern and future anti armour shoulder fired rocket systems, see below) Even wire guided shoulder fired rockets.

 

https://youtu.be/eEXpG7EBVYo