Tank DLC, Speculation.

[silentghoust 132]

So based on the video we can assume that CSAT will have the T-14, but have they mentioned or announced any of the others? Also, how will these tanks fit the scope and role of each faction? For example, Jet DLC provide air-superiority fighters that complemented the existing CAS aircraft. How will these new classes of tanks complement the Slammer, T-100, Kuma, ect? 

[R0adki11 3945]

12 minutes ago, silentghoust said:

So based on the video we can assume that CSAT will have the T-14, but have they mentioned or announced any of the others? Also, how will these tanks fit the scope and role of each faction? For example, Jet DLC provide air-superiority fighters that complemented the existing CAS aircraft. How will these new classes of tanks complement the Slammer, T-100, Kuma, ect? 

By classes of tank, what do you mean? I would assume the Tanks in the DLC would be additional but maybe more advanced main battle tanks. 

[silentghoust 132]

Yes, in terms of capabilities. Why the new JET DLC craft can multirole, the original collection of jets still are more suited for CAS. I'm curious what these tanks will offer in terms of fitting into each faction. NATO for example clearly needs a true MBT. AAF(assuming the 3rd is for AAF) kinda has a very nice MBT, and it's hard to see a nitch weapon system they could get with another style of tank. Unless they go oldschool t-34 but the only one can dream.

[Beagle 684]

4 minutes ago, silentghoust said:

Yes, in terms of capabilities. Why the new JET DLC craft can multirole, the original collection of jets still are more suited for CAS. I'm curious what these tanks will offer in terms of fitting into each faction. NATO for example clearly needs a true MBT. AAF(assuming the 3rd is for AAF) kinda has a very nice MBT, and it's hard to see a nitch weapon system they could get with another style of tank. Unless they go oldschool t-34 but the only one can dream.

I don't see a use for a 90 years old design in ArmA III.

[silentghoust 132]

3 minutes ago, Beagle said:

I don't see a use for a 90 years old design in ArmA III.

Soviet glory never dies my friend, only the 7.65mm rounds that pen it's armor :D. It would be interesting to see a old school tank for Syndikat or FIA. Obviously it won't be it though, but who knows. I can't think of many unique EU style tanks that they could model off.

[Beagle 684]

I believe we won't se much in new features with Tanks DLC. Basically just 3 well made new tanks with a good sound set and nice interiours....as well as an upgrade of the old ones. Im still quite disenchanted by the Jets DLC which already was not what I had exspected.

[Strike_NOR 898]

I love to speculate, but let's be real.

 

We are getting new content (Armored Vehicles) and their interiors (for new and old assets) + physiscs/handling and sound overhaul. For some reason I seem to remember reading about some AA vehicle a while back, may be wrong. Tanks are seriously vulnerable against air threats, especially jets become "untouchable" because of the standoff distance and speed. It would in many ways make sense to include a medium range AA system that can accompany tanks and offer some serious protection against aerial threats. This also plays well with the Jets DLC introduced sensors.

 

What I truly hope to see is better armor penetration and penetration effects.

 

This includes but is not limited to:

• Warhead types (HEAT, HE, AP, SABOT) with different strengths and weaknesses.
• Damage model improvements. More modules (especially ammo storage) that can suffer damage and cause various adverse conditions.
• Penetration system (better handling of ricochets, shell fragmentation, HE damage, spalling, HEAT etc)
• Vehicles explode due to combustible contents, not by default. I.e, if a truck without ammo gets hit, it will only catch fire at worst. If an ammo truck gets hit, it will explode if the ammo is damaged. Same for tanks, helicopters, planes etc. Less Michael Bay.

Here's hoping :)

[zukov 483]

i hope for syndiakat a m48 with and wihtout ERA or a state of the art t72 like in the garden on BI studioa and a reworked the t100 now is very ugly

[Sgt. Strongest Military Ever 19]

My predictions?

 

CSAT gets the T-14 (pretty much confirmed)

NATO gets an Abrams variant (either the M1A2 SEP v4 or a more futuristic M1A3) with an autoloader

 

Indies are the hardest to guess. The MBT-52 Kuma (aka Leopard 2) is already a heavyweight main battle tank. The only glaring thing indies lack right now are a dedicated anti-air vehicle and dedicated self-propelled artillery.

 

One thing I hope is that some of the vehicles that share turrets are updated with unique ones.

[silentghoust 132]

M1A3 is my guess as well, it honesly complements the Slammer well. 

As for indie,
A safe guess(and sad one) would be the Challenger 2/1. It would fit the EU semi-outdated theme of the AAF. However like other suggestions, I would be much pleased if they went to an outdated tank approach, so it can be sourced out to the other GUE style groups easier. 

[Strike_NOR 898]

2 hours ago, silentghoust said:

A safe guess(and sad one) would be the Challenger 2/1.

 

I can understand your feelings towards this, but I try to think about this differently:

 

If they release the Challenger 2/1, it fits Bohemias vision of the AAF forces. It still acts as an additional vehicle and can be used for many scenarios. I agree that it may not be a huge difference from the MBT-52 (Leopard 2) they already have, but nonetheless, it¨s extra content.

 

Outdated (per 2035 standard) tanks still exist in the form of mods. For me personally, it's through RHS mods which offer so much more than just the vehicles. RHS brings advanced armor mechanics, which brings me to my next point:

Engine features/enhancements!

 

I am WAY more excited for engine improvements and new features, simply because as far as we know, this DLC is the end of ArmA 3 development. Added features provide modders with more things to play with. After tanks DLC, the game will be more friendly for modders due to version stability. The game will be at its most polished, and with less frequent patches and changes, it will require a lot less revision by mod authors.

 

Therefore, I only see the vehicles of Tanks DLC as a bonus, and I am much more happy about the improved soundsets, physX upgrades and interiors. I can only hope and dream that the devs have time to implement proper armor penetration mechanics, ammo characteristics and damage mechanics.

 

I read in some update log that there was a new animation source for damaged tracks. I only hope that this means we may be getting better track damage visuals. I already know that RHS have pulled off HEAT simulation and if you have not tried it yet, man, you should. Set up a fully loaded BMP or M113. Fire a standard RPG-7 rocket at it and enter Splendid Camera. Set up the camera inside the crew compartment and watch in slow motion. You can see the "HEAT jet" shred through the compartment, injuring/killing the crew, engine, etc before exiting the other side. 

 

Since BIS have not added proper HEAT to the game, they have to fake it by using suboptimal indirect hit calculations for explosives, that functions nowhere near how HE or HEAT works in real life. It becomes a very arcade way of dealing damage to vehicles in the game. A hellfire missile doesn't kill tanks by exploding on the armor surface. It kills tanks by using a shaped charge (HEAT) which creates a jet of extreme temperature, speed and pressure that can force its way through armor. On the inside, the pressure increase, temperature increase and fragmentation will deal a lot of damage to crew, equipment and ammo. Many times, the tank is left as an empty steel coffin, while appearing almost 100% intact from outside. Other times, ammo catches fire and either detonates or burns out the tank instantly in spectacular fashion. In ArmA 3, the tank nearly always ends up exploding or surviving as if nothing happened. Try playing RHS and you will see a lot more variety in armored warfare. Many times tanks are immobilized by engine damage or incapacitated crew.

 

Right now, all BIS Anti-Tank bombs, missiles, rockets and anti tank shells just explode with a very high splash damage with a radius that reaches into the vehicles core and modules to cripple them, while in real life it's more like stabbing a needle through something really hard, to hit something really weak/critical.

 

RHS detects if the HEAT ammunition strikes a vehicle, then detonates. The explosion itself is harmful, but generally only towards soft targets. Simultaneously as the explosion occurs, a script spawns a "HEAT projectile" (or maybe multiple) that acts as standard BIS projectiles. It perforates armor of the vehicle, striking things inside in an expanding beam of shrapnel. However, if the HEAT ammunition strikes something else, such as terrain, a house or trees, the script does not detect a vehicle and only detonates with an explosion. The result is not 100% realistic, but it saves a lot of resources where HEAT modelling is not needed, and saves the necessary CPU load for when it actually hits a vehicle.

 

Even if BIS do not touch the armor penetration, which I think would be a mistake, I would still get my armor combat fix from RHS mods :) Even if they do not add a T-72 for INDep, I can still find a good T-72 mod :)

It is way harder to achieve things that push engine limitations, such as improving core game mechanics by scripts. That's why I want to see more of those improvements natively supported, rather than added content.

[Ex3B 265]

On 1/4/2018 at 11:14 AM, silentghoust said:

Yes, in terms of capabilities. Why the new JET DLC craft can multirole, the original collection of jets still are more suited for CAS. I'm curious what these tanks will offer in terms of fitting into each faction. NATO for example clearly needs a true MBT. AAF(assuming the 3rd is for AAF) kinda has a very nice MBT, and it's hard to see a nitch weapon system they could get with another style of tank. Unless they go oldschool t-34 but the only one can dream.

I also agree, I'm curious what if anything will set these tanks apart and prevent redundancy.

 

NATO does need a true MBT that isn't also doubling as a troop carrying IFV. That is a role that is unfilled in the NATO lineup (I'll often use the editor to block the cargoseats of a Slammer Up, and then change the gun from a 105mm to a 120mm to make a "true" MBT).

But... CSAT and the AAF already have dedicated MBTs. I suppose they could get a "Super IFV" (like what I consider the vanilla slammers to be), but that doesn't seem to fit with CSAT getting a T-14. I suspect the T-14 will simply outclass the T-100.

 

The Kuma seems a bit explody, at least to any sabot round that hits the shot trap/just below the cheek armor, but that's fine... I guess. Since the AAF uses old NATO gear, I could see them also getting an M1A2 Abrams.... but  it seems quite possible that the NATO forces should be getting an Abrams variant (the A3? the "Thumper" with a 140mm main gun?) as well, so I doubt 2 of the "new" tanks will be Abrams variants.

 

They basically already said that there won't be active defense systems

 

Realistically, if they stick with designs based on real world designs such as planned hardware or cancelled prototypes, there really aren't that many interesting vehicles to choose from and the T-14 is already a given. I would expect the NATO tank to be more advanced than the AAF one though. I'm kind of liking the M1 Thumper idea as its a cancelled prototype like the Commanche/"Blackfoot"... but I think this could also go to the AAF.

 

The only other interesting tank design out there that I could think of is the polish PL-01. Supposedly its going to have some thermal camo system based on peltier plates thermoelectric cooling. So... maybe they could add a "stealth tank" that has a very low IR signature. This would go well with NATO forces which seem to like having "stealthy" features - even if its only the black wasp that gets labelled as stealth - like the blackfood/ghosthawk.

 

So CSAT: T-14: very resistant to sabot fire, not shot traps/ spot between the hull and turret to shoot for a 1 shot kill

AAF: M1 Thumper: Just a tank with a big honking 140mm gun 

NATO: PL-01, harder to spot on thermals, hard to lock with IR guided missiles?

[nkenny 1051]

Like I wrote elsewhere. I hope we could get a proper tank and tracked IFV for NATO. As is I am expecting some weird turret-less stealth-rocket tank hybrid. *sigh*

Being real. Do not underestimate the gameplay benefit of getting older outdated tanks for factions that already have fairly modern solutions. Older tanks have interesting simulations-capabilities and the ebb and flow of capabilities make for interesting assymetric gameplay.  A modernised T72 for CSAT would be interesting. T55 or T34 for indep (syndicate like forces) too. 

 

To show off how good an ultra-modern MBT really is. It can be nice to have inferior foes to mess around with. 

[WastedMike_ 27]

On 1/4/2018 at 4:03 AM, Sgt. Strongest Military Ever said:

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

[DaViSFiT 21]

Im a big tank fan. Since i bought both Dlc packs and none of them really impressed me (half even disappointed me), im not very excited whats coming... new 3 vanilla tanks with perhaps some nice interieur. yeaaa...what a gamebreaker. A new tank suite for the crew? Oh Yeeeea. AI still too retarted to use a tank (show me always your back of your tank or drive 10m in front of infrantrie) or even an ifv? Lets have some fun.

[Alacazain 2]

Im actually hoping that AAF gets a self propelled artillery system like the Swedish Archer (since they lack of artillery).

 

Csat seems to get T14

 

Blufor: Hope they get a stealthy blackfoot lookalike tank. 

 

I love the new feutures with being able to fire Titan AT as a javelin, although i hope they make it harder to fire and lock it so it wont get too OP as it is now. Really hope they work some extra on the smoke countermessures aswell on the ground vehicles.

 

So far i really like what ive seen about the slat armors (cage) and the reactive armors. Going to be interesting to see how Heat will work and the whole new damage system.

[KizzouUl 21]

On 04/03/2018 at 2:49 AM, Alacazain said:

Im actually hoping that AAF gets a self propelled artillery system like the Swedish Archer (since they lack of artillery).

 

Csat seems to get T14

 

Blufor: Hope they get a stealthy blackfoot lookalike tank. 

 

I love the new feutures with being able to fire Titan AT as a javelin, although i hope they make it harder to fire and lock it so it wont get too OP as it is now. Really hope they work some extra on the smoke countermessures aswell on the ground vehicles.

 

So far i really like what ive seen about the slat armors (cage) and the reactive armors. Going to be interesting to see how Heat will work and the whole new damage system.

Hoping that FIA/Syndikat gets an hold Soviet Era MBT like T-72 to be able to respond to other factions ( NATO, CSAT ).


( Гиви with Сомали Battalion ) 

But a SPA for AAF it's a good idea too.

[Ex3B 265]

On 3/1/2018 at 9:47 AM, DaViSFiT said:

AI still too retarted to use a tank (show me always your back of your tank or drive 10m in front of infrantrie) or even an ifv? Lets have some fun.

Well, as a sort of work around to the AI issues, I think I read that they are allowing tank commanders to directly control the driving of the tank

I guess they figure if the players are all in a multiplayer community, that they only need AI good enough to portray the opfor :/ and that friendly tanks will be at least commanded by humans

 

On 3/7/2018 at 1:40 PM, KizzouUl said:

Hoping that FIA/Syndikat gets an hold Soviet Era MBT like T-72 to be able to respond to other factions ( NATO, CSAT ).
 

I was also hoping for some obsolete armor for weaker factions, and asymetric warfare scenarios. Syndicat is an Apex faction, so I doubt they'd make 1/3 to 2/3 of the new tanks for this DLC require another DLC... although I could see an FIA tank that has a syndicat reskin. T-14-> Opfor so if the other two tanks don't go to AAF and NATO, at least one of these factions gets left out. In the last DLC they at least gave FIA skins for Gorgon APCs, so FIA at least has some medium armor options.

Not that I wouldn't have loved for Syndicate to get some old M113s, amtracks, WWII and early cold war era light tanks, or something of that sort...

 

But.... I would also just absolutely love AAF jungle reskins, I don't care how contrived the lore would have to be, or if they are even for the AAF faction.

Syndicate could just as well use a jungle skin variant the Strider and Gorgon.

 

On 3/4/2018 at 2:49 AM, Alacazain said:

Im actually hoping that AAF gets a self propelled artillery system like the Swedish Archer (since they lack of artillery).

They also lack an armored AA system. Maybe they'dd get some sort of hybrid vehicle somewhat like the M6- linebacker.

I also remember that early in Arma development, there was a mortar variant of the Marshal.

The real world Merkava also can have a 60mm mortar.

So we could possibly get, possibly for the AAF, a heavy or medium armor platform that has a secondary indirect fire or AA role, without being a dedicated mobile AA system or SPG like CSAT and NATO have.

 

I would love it if there were actually more than 3 new vehicles... 3 base vehicles, but with some variants (like technically, the Jets DLC came with 6 new jets: Black Wasp, Black Wasp Stealth, Shikra, Shikra Stealth, Gryphon, Sentinel Drone).

The T-14 armata, for example, is meant to be the basis for a whole family of vehicles (in real life). I'd be very happy if there were turret variations of some of the new tanks.