Tanks DLC Feedback

[lex__1 422]

46 minutes ago, inlesco said:

If we know nothing about this upcoming DLC, it's a mystery why this thread is called "Tanks DLC feedback"... There's nothing to provide any feedback on since there's nothing official. 

Based on the DLC releases that brought new content and changed a lot for existing items in Arma3. For this reason, there is already much to talk about.

[wattywatts 76]

On 26. 8. 2017 at 3:00 PM, Night515 said:

Whatever CSAT may get, just please be sure to give them a green hex texture source! Please!

 

All premium vehicles will come with at least two texture variants, to fit on Altis and Tanoa type terrains.

[The Man Without Qualities 110]

On 26.8.2017 at 2:24 PM, Vasily.B said:

I woldnt say it about T-14

 

 

https://warisboring.com/we-now-know-how-many-t-14-armata-tanks-russia-will-build/

 

Quote

Moscow will build 100 T-14 Armata main battle tanks by 2020 according to a senior Russian defense official, putting to rest the fanciful notion that the Kremlin would build a fleet of 2,300 of fearsome new machines by that time.

 

 

So T-14 does not count because no real performance data available, they will act just as platforms to keep the knowledge of design and build excellent tanks, but RU cannot produce a modern tank army because of economical situation.

 

But 100 with 1/3 ready for combat all the time is good enought to conquer rest of Ukraina and also Belarussia.

[Vasily.B 529]

On 30.08.2017 at 2:49 PM, The Man Without Qualities said:

 

 

https://warisboring.com/we-now-know-how-many-t-14-armata-tanks-russia-will-build/

 

 

 

So T-14 does not count because no real performance data available, they will act just as platforms to keep the knowledge of design and build excellent tanks, but RU cannot produce a modern tank army because of economical situation.

 

But 100 with 1/3 ready for combat all the time is good enought to conquer rest of Ukraina and also Belarussia.

Whaaaat? They already started production and selling older tanks....

[DruidicRifleman 13]

1 Armour models that make sense... nicking the Rear of an IFV in the crew Compartment away from any ammunition or Fuel should not cause it to explode it should Liquify the Infantry how ever with spauling but yeah not Vaporise the IFV.

1.5 Armoured assets that look like an actually depoyed unit is using them

2 The Slammer should Exist as modeled... you modeled the Trophy APS... Also the Merkava has a 60mm Mortar... can i has 60mm Mortar as the tanks designed to have? or can i use the space it would take up for more ammo for the Pintle mount... Implement the M2 Coax.

2.1 the Pander with the NEMO 120mm that was cut from the game maybe give Csat the twin barrel but in a less mobile platform?

2.2 an L55 Equipt Varriant of the leopard and give the Current a loaders CROWS with the .338 MG as more of a Direct Fire Infantry Support Vehicle as the Leopard is actually fielded in some nations.

2.3 the leopard Recovery vehicle.

 

2.4 ambulance and Other AFV variants

3 maybe Light tank additions M8 Nato CV90-120 AAF Some Chinese light tank for CSAT or heck a Skankray 2 to change the Dynamics of combat?

 

4 As others have mentioned PLEASE... M1028 Canister and the 120MM IM HE-T with airburst capability (Heck the IDF have Croud control 120mm reduced lethality shells). Heab for the AFV's would be a blessing as well. I'd like to see Nato and Csat not using identical RWS's... Also while your adding HEAB to the IFV auto cannons ... you know the XM307 Advanced Crew Served Weapon air-burst capability right??? and the ability TO select what ammunition and type to load up with IN GAME not in the eden editor but Mid game if i realise while rearming i have no need to take more then 5 Sabot rounds to take extra 120mm Shot gun shells instead.

5 Interiors and the abilty for mounted infantry to turn out

6 this one... this one is a pipe dream but seriously i'd want a really frostbite inducing gritty Winder warfare map that has me deciding i need to Break out my Artic warfare kit to play as the perfect Setting to use the new armoured assets really can shine the battle For Fulda 2039 maybe?

Theres allot of good stuff but i wanted to Put my thoughts out there and stoped at page 8 the AI comments yeah Can we atleast get an AI tank driver Smart enough to Run over a snake and go "hehehe Me go look for more snakes" the AI we got now are so dumb.

[DruidicRifleman 13]

On 5/12/2017 at 6:00 AM, pipyn1970 said:

 In 2035 maybe in RL the nets used then might be made of a material that reduces the vehicles heat sig & outline better?  

Like the barracuda system used by Leapard 2a4 CAN and 2a6 CAN were using in afganistan which also along with ACE dramaticly increases crew comfort by limiting the amount of heat the tank absorbs from the sun and helping to Dissipate the heat the tank generates.

[AegisWolf 16]

Could they get rid of the seats in the M2A1s? I know they've already done the modeling, but that's where they put the tank ammo. Speaking of ammo, several non-tank armored vehicles seem to carry a ludicrously low amount of ammunition. If, for remote weapon stations, they don't put extra magazines because they cannot be reloaded without exiting said vehicle anyway, at least partially, they should implement a reload option on the outside, similar to the repair mechanic.

 

Looking forward to, hopefully, APS and better stabilization and optics, thermal or otherwise, for tankers.

[Steven Del 3]

The real reason why the put futuristic which is just almost identitcal to modern day tanks is that, They may be curious if they get sued by the weapon companies the Tanks are real but just a bid modified the Kuma is Leopard 2 MBT Revolution with a L/55 Rheinmetal 120mm gun instead of a L/44, there is already a revolution with a 130MM Rheinmetall gun being planned.

 

The Merkava is called the Slammer tank

The T-95 Black Eagle is called T-100 Varsuk

[jone_kone 158]

 

Considering how little completely new models the earlier DLC have contained I belive we shouldn´t hope for more than 3-4 new models. What I personally hope is that they would expand the dynamic loadout to APC:s and IFV:s and enabling new variations of current vanilla assets with interchangeable turrets and RCWS. e.g. currently there is only 1 dedicated vanilla AA vehicle.

[lexx 1391]

I had the same thought. Allowing to swap the turret would be pretty awesome. Add some more turret variants (mortar nemo system hurr durr) and I'd already be a happy panda.

[AegisWolf 16]

8 hours ago, lexx said:

I had the same thought. Allowing to swap the turret would be pretty awesome. Add some more turret variants (mortar nemo system hurr durr) and I'd already be a happy panda.

I'd love the ability to swap Pintle mounts, as well. .50 cals on Ghosthawks, and the like. Maybe even some of the remote weapon systems.

[DruidicRifleman 13]

Instead of a striker cause we know that BIS does not wanna rehash Stuff from Arma 2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B1_Centauro.

 

Also i mentioned Light tanks I present my recomendation for CSAT light tank https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanque_Argentino_Mediano cause argininia will likely Not want to Join nato over the Falkland islands being a British colony and fiercely British. Give the AAF Scorpian 90mm or maybe CV90105/120... And no not the scorpian from optre.

Pl-01 is an interesting idea... PL-01 with The M3a1 Mattis MBT a futuristic abrams 130mm 55 caliber Main gun with the PL-01 Steath features maybe for nato? And Reasonable sane assets like the Mortar Variant of the nato APC? The CV-90 and Patria have some Grounds for systems being used on both platforms As well though lately MOST nato nations are almost at the point where they may as well adopt a STANAG Turret ring and mounting specification. So swap-able Dynamic turret modding... would be interesting and some what possible the Marder has Variants that even have 155mm Howitzers

While maybe not for The commander or the Gunner... please interiors for drivers with usable Rear View cameras because the idiot Ai need to see behind them... PLEASE Make AI back up instead of turning around when being engaged.

I won't understate programmable HE ammunition and Canister shot and the ability To choose what ammo you load up the Mention of being able to swap out crows weapons... that could actually be rather useful.

[lex__1 422]

I want to see the changes for this ticket https://feedback.bistudio.com/T126270
There are several zones for aiming on targets. Zones should receive priority for defeat if they are in AI's field of vision.
Or any change in how it looks now.

Give the AI a wide range for selection.

I will add the reference to the early ticket for this problem

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120784

I didn't see him earlier, excuse.

[Vasily.B 529]

3 hours ago, lex__1 said:

I want to see the changes for this ticket https://feedback.bistudio.com/T126270
There are several zones for aiming on targets. Zones should receive priority for defeat if they are in AI's field of vision.
Or any change in how it looks now.

Give the AI a wide range for selection.

+1! I was reporting it year ago or more, i really would love to see it fixed.

[Ex3B 266]

On 8/28/2017 at 9:16 AM, wattywatts said:

 

All premium vehicles will come with at least two texture variants, to fit on Altis and Tanoa type terrains.

Can that be retroactively applied to the NATO vehicles in Tanoa.

 

Apex added Nato pacific forces, yet all the land vehicles except the Prowler still have the same color as their normal variants. Why did CSAT get Green Hex camo for their vehicles with Apex, but Nato didn't get any green camo for their vehicles?

 

Its going to look even worse if a NATO armored force has a mix of camo colors due to being a mix of Slammers/Marshals/Panthers, and whatever NATO assets are added by the tanks DLC.

[The Man Without Qualities 110]

On 11.9.2017 at 3:20 PM, lex__1 said:

I want to see the changes for this ticket https://feedback.bistudio.com/T126270
There are several zones for aiming on targets. Zones should receive priority for defeat if they are in AI's field of vision.
Or any change in how it looks now.

Give the AI a wide range for selection.

I will add the reference to the early ticket for this problem

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120784

I didn't see him earlier, excuse.

The proper handling of height, awareness about partly hidden targets and resulting actions is a permanent issue in many aspects of ArmAs methods of "calculating" the "visual" AI awareness.

Eigther totally ignored even if only partly hidden by an obstacle as in your example or permanent awareness even if totally hidden.

One would expect that AI would be able to calculate which part of the tank is not hidden by an obstacle and hence trying to hit it. But even the concrete barrier should not hinder, AI could "know" that visual shape belongs to an MBT and "guess" where the other parts are and trying to get through with kinetic rounds.

 

Edith (the bitchaaaa)

 

I just noticed...BIS closed the OLDER ticket and kept the newest alive...kinda statistics tweaking?

 

So Vasily reported this issue somewhere somehow in 2014...then opened a TT in November 2016 and Nightmare an duplicate in July 2017 and the current result after 9 months minimum or 2+ years maximum is......dear BIS?

 

 

[Ex3B 266]

On 8/28/2017 at 9:16 AM, wattywatts said:

 

All premium vehicles will come with at least two texture variants, to fit on Altis and Tanoa type terrains.

I just realized that if this is literally true with no exceptions, it means 1 of a few things:

 

#1) Independents will not get a "tank". AAF forces don't belong on Tanoa, so there shouldn't be any AAF armored vehicle with a texture variant to fit on Tanoa.

- Unless its just thrown in there for sandbox value: but like I mentioned in a previous post, it would look bad if just one asset was re-textured, and the remaining AAF forces would use a different camo pattern.

 

#2) They consider the AAF camo already fits on Tanoa (its not too bad for Tanoa, certainly better than NATO armor, but it could be better) and Altis, and/or there is a 2nd camo variant that isn't Tanoa specific (like the olive drab Hellcats, which fit OK with the Tanoa map) 

 

#3) There will be an armored vehicle shared between Independent and BluFor, with the Tanoa textures intended for BluFor forces

 

#4) There will be Independents on Tanoa with some armor... Syndicate managed to get some arms dealer to sell them tanks/ a new independent Tanoan faction? Though I still want a TAF that is largely similar to the AAF but with greener camo and a bit worse equipment, I really doubt this will happen in an upcoming BI DLC.

[lex__1 422]

3 hours ago, The Man Without Qualities said:

I just noticed...BIS closed the OLDER ticket and kept the newest alive...kinda statistics tweaking?

 

So Vasily reported this issue somewhere somehow in 2014...then opened a TT in November 2016 and Nightmare an duplicate in July 2017 and the current result after 9 months minimum or 2+ years maximum is......dear BIS?

Some mistake, they closed the early ticket

@Alwin

Early, the first ticket, it is necessary to open  -https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120784

 

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T126270 - the duplicate.

[Vasily.B 529]

18 hours ago, lex__1 said:

Some mistake, they closed the early ticket

@Alwin

Early, the first ticket, it is necessary to open  -https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120784

 

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T126270 - the duplicate.

Yes, plus i was reporting it very long itme ago, on old feedback tracker, but ticket has gone. 
This was recorded as continuation for closed tickets : 

Edit : Put down volume before playing video!

[Janez 532]

On 9/11/2017 at 3:20 PM, lex__1 said:

 

 

Tank gets hit in right side but damage is also shown on left side...

[AegisWolf 16]

From an ease of use standpoint, I don't know if this is realistic, but it'd be nice if BI adjusted the FCS, that if one ranges/tracks a target, the stabilization takes that into consideration and pivots around the ranged point. This would also be very helpful for attack helicopters.

A new look at ground vehicle countermeasures, both hard and soft, is also very much in order.

[DruidicRifleman 13]

4 hours ago, AegisWolf said:

From an ease of use standpoint, I don't know if this is realistic, but it'd be nice if BI adjusted the FCS, that if one ranges/tracks a target, the stabilization takes that into consideration and pivots around the ranged point. This would also be very helpful for attack helicopters.

A new look at ground vehicle countermeasures, both hard and soft, is also very much in order.

Think the abrams FCS has features for that

[maxl30 81]

We need a Mine Roller for the MRAPs and the Tanks or an real Anti Mine Tank like the german Keiler

A good idea is an Bridge Layer  (On a Tank or a Truck)

 

I hope u enjoy my Ideas ^^

[Ex3B 266]

On 9/13/2017 at 10:20 PM, AegisWolf said:

From an ease of use standpoint, I don't know if this is realistic, but it'd be nice if BI adjusted the FCS, that if one ranges/tracks a target, the stabilization takes that into consideration and pivots around the ranged point. This would also be very helpful for attack helicopters.

A new look at ground vehicle countermeasures, both hard and soft, is also very much in order.

That's essentially what the blackfish guns do, so I'm sure they could add that feature to tanks (and helo gunners too)

[AegisWolf 16]

12 hours ago, Ex3B said:

That's essentially what the blackfish guns do, so I'm sure they could add that feature to tanks (and helo gunners too)

It might also help if they gave us the option to make the mouse a first order controller for vehicle turrets, instead of a simple pointer.

 

This is how I see a new balance with a hard counter APS on tanks and hopefully heavy APCs/IFVs:

 

A) Individual APS turret stops any and all incoming HEAT and HE rounds, including from other tanks, within its arc of fire, at any volume of fire. Heavy AT missiles, such as the Macer or Kh-25 are up for debate, possibly being intercepted, but still doing at least superficial damage, possibly with a chance to deal enough damage to disable the offending APS turret. It's worth noting that a laser-guided bomb is probably not going to be intercepted at sufficient range to prevent catastrophic damage to the tank. It should probably ignore anything below ~60mm, otherwise an HE autocannon would simply force it to expend all of its ammunition.

B) Individual APS turrets have limited ammunition. Replenishment should be through the ammo trucks, same as soft countermeasures.

C) Individual APS turrets have limited firing arcs, depending on placement, and position of the turret. There may be a gap in the arcs, depending on the tank. They may overlap in other areas. In these areas, only one countermeasure should fire, from the launcher with the most shots left.

D) APS systems do not stop kinetic projectiles, such as APFSDS shells fired from other tanks or armored vehicles. This also includes machine gun and small arms fire.

E) Individual APS turrets have limited durability. They should be slightly more durable than remote weapon systems, given their provenance on heavy armor, but only slightly. They are also slightly smaller targets than remote weapon systems in addition to being on a mobile platform.

 

Concluding:

Infantry would be able to take advantage of the APS turrets' vulnerability to kinetic projectiles, and use such systems as sniper rifles, remote .50 cal turrets, or even a friendly IFV in ambush to knock out APS turrets, rendering the tank vulnerable to anti-tank missiles.

Tankers, conversely, would be able to take advantage of the fact that they have multiple APS turrets responsible for different arcs, and in the case of running out of interceptors, or a disabled APS turret at one location, should rotate the turret to keep the tank covered.

 

I'd actually like to see APS systems on the Mora, Panther, and Kamysh, in addition to the MBTs.