Tanks DLC Feedback

[Greenfist 1863]

27 minutes ago, Vasily.B said:

I would also give you guys more screens of how those scripts "work" but for some reason i cannot take screenshot anymore,as after 64 bit support steam overlay also not work.

It's working fine on my system. Is your steam up-to-date and steam overlay enabled? And if you have any other overlay programs, try closing them.

 

Another simple way is to press the print screen button, then go here: http://imgur.com/upload and press ctrl+v. Or just paste it here in the comments.

 

Or you could run 32-bit just for the screenshots.

[Belbo 462]

I had this problem as well. For me it was Riva TunerStatisticsServer.

[Vasily.B 529]

For me none of mentioned methods work, i disabled Riva, checked settings of steam, properties of arma in library and it just dont want to work, i just typed these in gooogle and it seems i'm not the only one.

[Ex3B 266]

I'm going to assume Tanks refers to all armored vehicles, not just MBTs.

 

What I'd like to see:

 

* for the nth time, Tank interiors, at least for the driver. Being able to see out of the left and right prisms as in OFP was great as a driver. One could see a bit to the sides without turning the whole tank or turning out. It was less useful to a commander because the commander could just turn the "camera". The interior view of the gunners was basically completely useless though. I still miss the driver view.

 

* Ambulance APCs

 

* Pacific/jungle/green textures for the Nato armored vehicles (come on, how was that not included in APEX?)... possibly AAF as well, or a virtual clone of AAF forces... the TAF, because the AAF was a very well developed faction, and there's no independant faction for Tanoa that can really stand up to CSAT/NATO

- I actually liked that Arma2 didn't just give us T-55s and T-72s that we had since OFP, but it gave us T-34s. Considering the WW2 wrecks on Tanoa, a WW2 era tank wouldn't be too out of place for a syndicate armored vehicle. A russian tank wouldn't make much sense, and Japanese tanks... well sucked... Imagine Syndicate rolling out a rusty M4 sherman... I want it, I don't care if it will be a death trap for syndicate forces, it could go well with missions.

 

* Something like the Stryker MGS, that was a fun vehicle... I don't really care which side gets it or if multiple sides get a version

 

* APC balance, tank Balance. NATO needs a better tracked APC/IFV. AAF has the best wheeled/amphibious IFV (gorgon), CSAT has the best tracked... NATO doesn't even have an IFV with AT missiles. The 40mm gun of the marshall vs the 30mm guns of the AAF/CSAT IFVs doesn't seem much more powerful - its just got more limited ammo. The only way you can say NATO has the best IFV is with APEX and the blackfish: NATO has the best airmobile IFV, as none of the tracked ones fit and neither does the gorgon.

Or, if you count the slammer as an IFV... which is might as well be...

I strongly dislike the main slammer with its weakish armor, slow speed, and extra vulnerability to infantry (no commander MG, only 6.5mm coaxial mg). So... SlammerUP and forget about MBT to MBT combat with the 105mm gun unless you get hits right at the weak areas... it will chew up other APCs.

 

CSAT needs a better wheeled/amphibious APC - the armament it's APC has right now is not suited for use against other armored vehicles. No amphibious vehicle that can go up against APCs? not good IMO

NATO needs a better tracked APC (the panther isn't equipped to fight other APCs), unless you just admit the Slammer is an APC, which leads to:

NATO needs a MBT that focuses on its own combat capacity, and not just being a well defended APC carrying 6 soldiers.

It wouldn't hurt to give the AAF an artillery piece, even if its a wheeled system that needs to deploy.

- not sure anything needs to be done about MRAPs, they are all pretty equal except for small quirks like the AAF having the only amphibious MRAP, and the only armed MRAP that can be moved by a VTOL.

 

* a new beefier UGV. If the jets DLC gave us a new drone, then why not a new UGV. The stomper/Saif is very weak... 3 shots from the lynx with APDS rounds will take it out (9 rounds of ball)/ or 12 rounds from a 12.7mm machinegun/ 3-4 20mm grenade rounds. Even .338 machineguns are deadly to it, its very vulnerable to SAF.

 

* mobile Radar systems with data links that can send targeting data to (mobile?) SAMs firing radar guided missiles.

[Ex3B 266]

You think the added jets are completely unrealistic?

The armament of the black wasp (at least the stealth/internal armament) is completely consistent with an F-22.

The Gryphon seems pretty comparable to a Saab Gripen, and I don't know how the Shikra compares to the Pak FA, but I doubt its so ridiculous.

 

Sure, I'd rather not have a fictional Hornet-Rapto hybrid, but its nothing like a hover tank with 3 cannons and 2 turrets

[R0adki11 3949]

thread cleaned up, can we try to stay on topic.

[Ex3B 266]

Anyway, to elaborate on my above suggestion, some AA systems in addition to the tigris/cheetah (also making them visually distinct from each other) that use radar guided missiles and data links.

We could have something like this:

http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/TPS78AndTPS703/PublishingImages/pageImages/tps78hm.jpg

That datalinks to something like this:

Which would lack a radar of its own.

We could also of course have armored vehicles like these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crotale_(missile)#/media/File:Crotale_missile_launchers_DSC00866.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Military_parade_in_Baku_on_an_Army_Day34.jpg

But with their own radars, they'd be vulnerable to HARM missiles if/when we get them

[chortles 263]

On 5/22/2017 at 6:22 PM, Ex3B said:

* mobile Radar systems with data links that can send targeting data to (mobile?) SAMs firing radar guided missiles.

As of dev build v1.71.141872 (the 29 May 2017 dev branch update) the Cheetah/Tigris can perform this role with the Mk21 Centurion as the launcher, thanks to the addition of a datalink sensor (requires that Data Link Receive is enabled in the vehicle's Eden Attributes window under "Object - Electronics & Sensors") to them and to the Mk49 Spartan and Praetorian 1C; although the changelog specifies the Praetorian, the Cheetah/Tigris also has "a 360° scan coverage" and a mission-maker can attachTo the Centurion to a ground vehicle. The current main downside to this arrangement seems to be that radar-guided missiles require that the launching vehicle's radar be toggled on to begin the lock and up through launch, thereby exposing the launching vehicle to radar warning receivers and ARMs; I have not yet tested whether aware/combat behavior can be used to force the Centurion's 'autonomous vehicle AI' to wait until a datalink contact (targeting data) is received before toggling on its radar.

[xxgetbuck123 945]

I think what we first need before adding vehicles (of which they're already doing anyway), but it more the physics and overall driving of tanks.

 

1) Proper gearing for tanks 

2) Proper engine performance parameters

2) PhysX based tracks (if possible, instead of just moving textures)

[silentghoust 132]

Would like the following.

• A outdated armor vehicle of some sort for guerilla factions to utilize
• New variants for the current armor selection. HQ VARIANT PLEASE
• Crew properly modeled so they can be effected. Nothing fancy, just if AP round hits were said crew is, they die.
• Proper ERA set up? Maybe something using secondary models that take the blow first.
• Amphibious capabilities for tracked vehicles.
• Crew catch on fire! :D, I know terrible but no one has modded this game yet. I kinda miss the ol'screams of terror. 

 

Edit: Almost forgot, Bobcat recovery functionality. Ability to use it's crane and such.

[Vasily.B 529]

15 hours ago, silentghoust said:

Would like the following.

• Amphibious capabilities for tracked vehicles.

 

Its already done AFAIK. :)

But crew catching fire, ammunition spalling, detonation and "cook off" would be beautyfull.

[Daniel Gilliland 0]

I think  there are a fedw tanks in game, maybe need a few more with more toys on them etc, but what I would really like to see is a bigger range of AA capability. Should the tigerish lock-on with its run system? I would have thought so since it wouldn't be hard to do these days

[D. Tropa 1]

I'm just going to cover what TANKS I'd like to see in the Tanks DLC. Following the pattern of the Jets DLC, we have one for each faction, then a bonus vehicle. 

 

First, CSAT. This has been hinted to be the T-14 Armata, and what a great choice it is. But give it the proposed 152mm gun. Why? Because it would be boring if all the new tanks in the game had the same gun as the present tanks. Also, having a platoon of these guys roll up on you would be the indicator that everything is being turned up to 11. The T-14 Armata has up to date electronic warfare and ACTIVE armour protection fitted, as well as ERA, Composite and RHA. 

 

NATO. You could put in the Abhrams. But, as with the choice of guns, this would be boring. My choice would be the AMX Leclerc. It's a bit left field, but one of the best tanks in NATO atm (I know there's a lot of 'best tanks' to choose from in NATO), but it is the one of the first tanks to actually have a 140mm gun fitted to it (to counter the T-14s 152mm). It already has a three man crew, and has armour designed to be effective against both HEAT and sabot (composite, but not chobham), and has the ability for electronic counter measures. Also, just give the Slammer UP an 120mil already.

 

AAF. With them already having the Kuma, I feel more inclined not to give the AAF another MBT. After all, their equipment is NATO hand-me-downs. Just give it a few upgrades in terms of active armour and electronic warfare. Possibly the new Rhemintal 130mm gun. What I'm more interested in is a possible light tank or SPG.  The former would be the M8 AGS, the latter the M1228 MGS. Both have 105mm guns and excellent mobility. The idea of introducing these AFVs is to have something to support mechanized infantry and IFVs that isn't a tank, or be part of a QRF (both M8 and the M1228 are designed to be air dropped), or direct fire support for a small infantry force. It would be nice to have something that fits the gap between IFV and MBT.  Out of the two, I'd favour the M1228, as it is actually in service atm, and it shares the same chassis as the Gorgon. 

 

The bonus vehicle. Something for the FIA and Syndicate to use. Something that would make you go "Errrr, they've got a tank" when your on a spec ops COIN mission. Nothing fancy, but still a threat. The T-34 and M4 Medium tank are touted out, but by 2035, they would be REALLY long in the tooth, (and require a four man crew, and would want to be the loader?). My choice would be the AMX 13, either the 75 or 90 autoloading gun (thus a three man crew). It's a tiny tank, barely taller than a man, so easy to hide in bushes or in defilades. A great ambush tank, and highly mobile. Its also thinly armoured, so the cannon mounted on IFV should make quick work of it if spotted. But equally so, the 75/90 guns should be able to deal with IFV, and could worry an MBT if it got around the back (think the Tiger battle from Fury here).  And it would also fit on Altis or Tanoa, since it's feasible that a newly independent Altis/Tanoa brought a bunch from the French in the 70's, and somehow they got into FIA's/Syndicate's hands. 

 

Some of the features I'd like would be, as hinted at above, an actual armour model, that takes into account different projectiles and armour compositions. Electronic warfare capabilities for the MBTs, so you know when you are being locked on by an ATGM, and use electronic counter measures. If that doesn't work, active armour protection, so the incoming ATGM is shot down before it hits the tank, automatically (but you should be able to turn the system off, so that if friendly infantry are close, the system doesn't kill them). Also, more than one periscope for the driver when he has turned in. And a reverse camera. Better physics and tank AI would be nice (people have already covered that in more detail that I can do). 

[jone_kone 158]

1 hour ago, D. Tropa said:

I'm just going to cover what TANKS I'd like to see in the Tanks DLC. Following the pattern of the Jets DLC,.....

 

A few new tanks would be really nice. But again I´m hoping that most of the upgrades would be on the "engine side". An upgraded Armour simulation, APS and a LWR (similar to the Jets RWR) to the tank crews would be really sweet. Also Dynamic loadouts with different weapon stations for the APC:s would rock. 

[TrueMonolith 13]

On 16.6.2017 at 0:32 PM, D. Tropa said:

...

The bonus vehicle. Something for the FIA and Syndicate to use. Something that would make you go "Errrr, they've got a tank" when your on a spec ops COIN mission. Nothing fancy, but still a threat. The T-34 and M4 Medium tank are touted out, but by 2035, they would be REALLY long in the tooth, (and require a four man crew, and would want to be the loader?). My choice would be the AMX 13, either the 75 or 90 autoloading gun (thus a three man crew). It's a tiny tank, barely taller than a man, so easy to hide in bushes or in defilades. A great ambush tank, and highly mobile. Its also thinly armoured, so the cannon mounted on IFV should make quick work of it if spotted. But equally so, the 75/90 guns should be able to deal with IFV, and could worry an MBT if it got around the back (think the Tiger battle from Fury here).  And it would also fit on Altis or Tanoa, since it's feasible that a newly independent Altis/Tanoa brought a bunch from the French in the 70's, and somehow they got into FIA's/Syndicate's hands. 

 

...

 

This is actually a brilliant idea! If there was an AMX 13 I'd never play another tank again! :D

[trent 14]

I think as GreenFor already has an excellent tank and a powerful IFV they'll give it a light artillery unit, like the G6 Rhino

 

We already know OpFor gets the T-14.

 

For BluFor I think they'll do a repeat of its CAS unit by having a futurised Abrams, with the railgun that was cut during game development and the exterior trappings of Poland's PL-01.

 

The rest of development will focus on game-side stuff like realistic damage.

[OMAC 254]

On 5/21/2017 at 9:22 AM, belbo said:

I had this problem as well. For me it was Riva TunerStatisticsServer.

 

Same here.  I always start Afterburner + Riva AFTER I start up A3 to get Steam Overlay to work.

 

This is not true for many other games, and I wish BI would fix that.

[Belbo 462]

On 23.6.2017 at 4:53 PM, OMAC said:

 

Same here.  I always start Afterburner + Riva AFTER I start up A3 to get Steam Overlay to work.

This is not true for many other games, and I wish BI would fix that.

You simply have to add Arma3_x64.exe to the application profile properties of Riva for it to work without the need to start anything afterwards.

[OMAC 254]

7 hours ago, belbo said:

You simply have to add Arma3_x64.exe to the application profile properties of Riva for it to work without the need to start anything afterwards.

 

That doesn't work for me using Riva stats 6.4.1 or 6.5.0.  I added Arma3_x64.exe and messed around with Riva options for it, and Steam Overlay still will not work unless I start A3 before Afterburner + Riva.

 

Note this in RivaTuner 6.5.0 documentation:
 

Quote

64-bit Steam overlay library has been removed from delayed hooking engine configuration. Now On-Screen Display is being
rendered immediately after starting 64-bit Steam applications without 15 second delay. Power users may still add 64-bit Steam
overlay library to delayed hooking engine configuration if necessary

 

 

As far as I can tell, RivaTuner kills Steam Overlay startup.  If there is some way to configure Riva profiles for a3 x64 and/or Steam to enable the overlay startup, please let me know.

[1SG.Smithen.C 3]

On 6/16/2017 at 6:32 AM, D. Tropa said:

I'm just going to cover what TANKS I'd like to see in the Tanks DLC. Following the pattern of the Jets DLC, we have one for each faction, then a bonus vehicle. 

 

First, CSAT. This has been hinted to be the T-14 Armata, and what a great choice it is. But give it the proposed 152mm gun. Why? Because it would be boring if all the new tanks in the game had the same gun as the present tanks. Also, having a platoon of these guys roll up on you would be the indicator that everything is being turned up to 11. The T-14 Armata has up to date electronic warfare and ACTIVE armour protection fitted, as well as ERA, Composite and RHA. 

 

NATO. You could put in the Abhrams. But, as with the choice of guns, this would be boring. My choice would be the AMX Leclerc. It's a bit left field, but one of the best tanks in NATO atm (I know there's a lot of 'best tanks' to choose from in NATO), but it is the one of the first tanks to actually have a 140mm gun fitted to it (to counter the T-14s 152mm). It already has a three man crew, and has armour designed to be effective against both HEAT and sabot (composite, but not chobham), and has the ability for electronic counter measures. Also, just give the Slammer UP an 120mil already.

 

AAF. With them already having the Kuma, I feel more inclined not to give the AAF another MBT. After all, their equipment is NATO hand-me-downs. Just give it a few upgrades in terms of active armour and electronic warfare. Possibly the new Rhemintal 130mm gun. What I'm more interested in is a possible light tank or SPG.  The former would be the M8 AGS, the latter the M1228 MGS. Both have 105mm guns and excellent mobility. The idea of introducing these AFVs is to have something to support mechanized infantry and IFVs that isn't a tank, or be part of a QRF (both M8 and the M1228 are designed to be air dropped), or direct fire support for a small infantry force. It would be nice to have something that fits the gap between IFV and MBT.  Out of the two, I'd favour the M1228, as it is actually in service atm, and it shares the same chassis as the Gorgon. 

 

The bonus vehicle. Something for the FIA and Syndicate to use. Something that would make you go "Errrr, they've got a tank" when your on a spec ops COIN mission. Nothing fancy, but still a threat. The T-34 and M4 Medium tank are touted out, but by 2035, they would be REALLY long in the tooth, (and require a four man crew, and would want to be the loader?). My choice would be the AMX 13, either the 75 or 90 autoloading gun (thus a three man crew). It's a tiny tank, barely taller than a man, so easy to hide in bushes or in defilades. A great ambush tank, and highly mobile. Its also thinly armoured, so the cannon mounted on IFV should make quick work of it if spotted. But equally so, the 75/90 guns should be able to deal with IFV, and could worry an MBT if it got around the back (think the Tiger battle from Fury here).  And it would also fit on Altis or Tanoa, since it's feasible that a newly independent Altis/Tanoa brought a bunch from the French in the 70's, and somehow they got into FIA's/Syndicate's hands. 

 

Some of the features I'd like would be, as hinted at above, an actual armour model, that takes into account different projectiles and armour compositions. Electronic warfare capabilities for the MBTs, so you know when you are being locked on by an ATGM, and use electronic counter measures. If that doesn't work, active armour protection, so the incoming ATGM is shot down before it hits the tank, automatically (but you should be able to turn the system off, so that if friendly infantry are close, the system doesn't kill them). Also, more than one periscope for the driver when he has turned in. And a reverse camera. Better physics and tank AI would be nice (people have already covered that in more detail that I can do). 

Not to mention that by 2035 a sherman or T34 is just that much older. There isn't many of them rolling around today and the ones that are, are in museums. Good luck finding a working sherman on a tiny island like Tanoa. Also parts for it would be really

hard to find, they are hard to find today, even more so then, and good luck to a guerrilla force trying to maintain and repair said tank, without the ability to pick through the internet for very expensive and old parts and have them shipped to their front door like a museum.

[Beagle 684]

Regarding WW2 tanks...we had them in ArmA II anf they were nt really a big thread to even a half aware and also outdated BMP-2... the T-55 did not do any better. "old" Regular 25mm Autocannons would turn a T-34 into swiss cheese before it could react with a penetration power of 100mm RHA with M919 APFSDS-T.

Even fairly modern AT infantry weapons shredded them easily at safe ranges.

[The Man Without Qualities 110]

Well, IMHO all tracked or wheeled vehicles of any era should be in A3, but only a few made by BIS.

What I do expect is a few fully modeled vehic of each kind as game engine demonstrators, thats it, plus excellent documentation.

 

In addition a kind of "high court" of parametrization should be established at BIS where BIS emplyoees decide about the parameters of any addon brought to that level. Here you can get a BIS certification that the addon in question is compliant with engine feature set xyz and fits into the overall balancing of parameters between shell/armour; radiation/sensors and that it is compliant with referenced real life (historic) parameters as long as available.

 

That way it is more likely to get all world wide available toys into A3 or A4, it makes no sense to wait for BIS to do that.

And RHS or CUP do always their own thing in terms of balancing, there will be NEVER a proper way to make addons of different sources working together in an acceptable way except of having an authority on top of that does the final decision.

[Vasily.B 529]

Tank suspension..... the way its done now its very... stiff. Shooting tank with turret rotated at 90 degree makes almost no deviation. Landing the tank with its nose little lower than back just stops him. And nitro-turbo-ironman-manga-anime-rocket-atom powered random launches of tracked vehicles need to be gone..

[esfumato 75]

Choose your 3 favorites from this lists:

http://tanknutdave.com/self-propelled-anti-aircraft-vehicles/

 

http://tanknutdave.com/main-battle-tanks/

 

http://tanknutdave.com/tank-destroyers/

[Antilochos 106]

That UE4 suspension, that's what I would love to see!