Tanks - Armored vehicles customization

[kllrt 154]

11 hours ago, xxgetbuck123 said:

Holy shit yes! This is great!

 

One quick question @kllrt, will there be documentation coming with this feature so modders can readily add it to their vehicles? 

 

There is no need for new documentation, we used Vehicle Customization (VhC).

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

Any plans to add hidden selections for the bags? Would be nice to have MTP bags for NATO, Hex for CSAT, etc.

[lonewolf96 44]

Would be nice if you could choose which specific camo net colour you want. 

It would also be nice to have some more camo schemes for the Nato armor and the AAF vehicles and tanks. 

[ceolnariazz 39]

3 hours ago, kllrt said:

 

There is no need for new documentation, we used Vehicle Customization (VhC).

 

could you also use https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Vehicle_Loadouts  on Hunters , striders , Ifrits AAAAAND the LSVs (GMG and minigun for all XD) ? :)  

[lexx 1391]

34 minutes ago, lonewolf96 said:

Would be nice if you could choose which specific camo net colour you want.

 

Well, there is no fancy magic involved. You can do that via a simple script and hidden selections.

[R3vo 2654]

I really love the new system adds alot of varity to the game without introducing an incredible amount of new vehicle classes.

 

Here's some feedback:

 

- If time allows, add more paint jobs for the vehicles

- The Hex camouflage is not selected by default when editing the Marid in the Virtual Garage. I am actually wondering why Hex is listed there because its the default and only paint job this vehicle has. The Marshall for example has no texture listed in the Garage.

- The NATO artillery has no camo net for the cannon, the CSAT one has one however.

- The Kuma and T100 could have more options. For main battle tanks which this DLC is focused at it looks a bit weak compared to the APCs. (A mine sweeper would be nice but most likely not possible)

- Does adding fuel canisters and ammoboxes actually have an effect? If not, that would be sweet.

- Why isn't it possible to add/remove the armour plates of the Slamme via the new system? Looks like a missed opportunity to me.

- Add camo nets and other stuff to the Strider, Ifrit and Hunter

 

That last point is a bigger one: Why is vehicle customization limited to visual things (I know they have an effect on thermal vision etc) only? I would have loved to see the customisation of ammo count as well via the garage.

[jakeplissken 81]

Vehicle customization from EDEN editor does not apply in MP. We will need scripting commands so we can apply these settings to the vehicles, and then reapply them with a vehicle respawn script. Will this be able to be scripted as well as using a UI? Otherwise this will not work in MP.

[x3kj 1247]

2 hours ago, R3vo said:

That last point is a bigger one: Why is vehicle customization limited to visual things (I know they have an effect on thermal vision etc) only? I would have loved to see the customisation of ammo count as well via the garage.

Because adding some hide animations is very simple, requires no engine changes.  Adding customization of ammo is more complicated, propably requires engine changes.

 

3 minutes ago, jakeplissken said:

Vehicle customization from EDEN editor does not apply in MP. We will need scripting commands so we can apply these settings to the vehicles, and then reapply them with a vehicle respawn script. Will this be able to be scripted as well as using a UI? Otherwise this will not work in MP.

The additional options are just animations - you can hide/unhide the stuff by script just like modifying any other existing vehicle animation

 

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

 

Marid's Green Hex livery still has leftover AO in the textures.

[lexx 1391]

^ Same for all the other vehicles where you can remove the tools.

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

looking good so far.

 

should the camo netting be having any gameplay effect or just cosmetic?

[lonewolf96 44]

15 hours ago, lexx said:

 

Well, there is no fancy magic involved. You can do that via a simple script and hidden selections.

What I meant was theres different camo netting for the U.S. vehicles and the CSAT vehicles but you can't choose which one you want, if you want the desert, mid or pacific one. It depends on the vehicle which one you choose. you should be able to choose any camo net you want irrelevant of if its a pacific vehicle or a altis vehicle. 
 

[teabagginpeople 398]

1 hour ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

looking good so far.

 

should the camo netting be having any gameplay effect or just cosmetic?

It is supposed to lower visibility of the tank under ti. 

 

Needs some more balancing.

[Rhyder_Morra 74]

Can we get greeny camo nets fo csat(arid)\nato vehicle?

[lex__1 422]

I see only one type of camouflage grids, for each vehicle. On all grids there are places for toolkit even if toolkit isn't located on outer side of the vehicle.

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

3 hours ago, teabagginpeople said:

It is supposed to lower visibility of the tank under ti. 

 

Needs some more balancing.

 

tested a couple hrs ago, there was no difference in thermal signature

 

it did reduce visibility well without thermal though, at +500m

[SuicideKing 233]

4 hours ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

 

tested a couple hrs ago, there was no difference in thermal signature

 

it did reduce visibility well without thermal though, at +500m

Yeah, i tried with the Slammer and Slammer UP today, that seemed to be the case.

 

BTW, seeing so many options for customization, would be nice if this ticket was addressed too...

Remove faction lock on vehicle skins in Eden Editor - https://feedback.bistudio.com/T123252

would also be nice to have the Gorgon's NATO skin be selectable in the Editor and Virtual Garage.

 

p.s. I didn't want to bring this up, since it's related to vehicle customisation but not tanks, but here goes just in case there's time or the will to do it:

The Armed Prowler has ammo boxes in place of seats at the back. Could a customisation option be added to replace those boxes with seats? That way we'll be able to seat a full 6-man fire team in the same vehicle, and it'll bring the seating capacity closer to the other three LSV variants.

 

Cheers again for all the cool stuff with Tanks!

[Hvymtal 1251]

I just noticed that you guys added olive variants of the armored vehicles. They are quite snazzy, but shouldn't the Hunter and HEMTT receive olive textures, as well? For that matter, shouldn't the MRAPs and trucks also have camouflage netting and perhaps some flavor bags and tools as mentioned earlier? Turning the Hunter's bed tarp into a selectable object and adding some stuff to go in there would be a good idea for this purpose, as an example.

 

And yes, textures really shouldn't be faction locked at this point if the vehicle is otherwise unavailable for said faction. I want my NATO Strider so I can lase some fools!

 

@SuicideKing I think the ammo in the Prowler's bed was to balance the armed version against the unarmed version, giving you a tactical/gameplay/balance reason to choose one over the other and balance against the Qilin as the Prowler arguably has more useful firepower with the Caliber .50 and the SPMG. The armed Prowler gives you that .50, the Qilin arguably just takes the squad's Zafir you'll already have in the gunner seat anyway and increases the rate of fire. Furthermore a fully manned Prowler with two more SPMGs in the rear passenger seats definitely already has enough firepower

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

The Vehicle Blackfish seems to be unable to transport the Marshall APC now.

 

As the only APC it can lift, this would be a rather large blow to gameplay.

 

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

MLRS tank has non-existent animation source "showCamonetCannon"

 

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

It would also be good if there are some vehicle performance effects to using the Slat armor, like lower acceleration, lower top speed, maneuverability, etc.

 

I am trying to think of reasons why a player would NOT apply slat armor, if it was a free choice in a mission.

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

1 hour ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

The Vehicle Blackfish seems to be unable to transport the Marshall APC now.

 

As the only APC it can lift, this would be a rather large blow to gameplay.

 

Also it completely ruins the concept of Steel Pegasus. :P

[Strike_NOR 898]

36 minutes ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

I am trying to think of reasons why a player would NOT apply slat armor, if it was a free choice in a mission.

 

Well yes, theres technically a reason you would not use this IRL. And you raise a valid point.

 

The easy way: remove freedom of choice.

 

For gamemodes like KOTH, the Slat-equipped vehicles could be more costly.

 

The way I see it, bis are implementing it as a means to counter all HEAT ammo, while IRL it is only designed to defeat the widely used RPG-7. Even against the RPG-7 it only has about 50% success ratio, because the RPG still has to hit between the slats. If the RPG hits the slat armor directly, the impact fuze will function as normal and the shaped charge will actually have more time to form into an even more efficient jet, increasing the RPG penetration. If the RPG hits between the slats, the nosecone is crushed, cutting the wires that connect the fuze to the detonator.

 

So it's not really a wonderful countermeasure, because most other HEAT warheads are designed so they will function even when hitting the slats, or between them. The effectiveness these warheads also gains a boost to penetration, due to the increased standoff distance provided by slat armor.

 

Alas, I can't imagine BIS going through all that trouble to simulate the differences of an RPG-7VL rocket vs all the other weapons. Therefore, it becomes more of a "must have" as anyone with a HEAT weapon will be at a slight disadvantage, and you as vehicle operator have no disadvantages.

 

If they did, however, only make it useful against low-tech HEAT weapons, such as RPG-7, and make modern HEAT weapons gain effectiveness against SLAT-equipped vehicles then you would use SLAT for asymmetrical urban/CQB combat only and ditch them when facing high-tech enemies.

 

Just mah two cents

[teabagginpeople 398]

8 minutes ago, Strike_NOR said:

 

Well yes, theres technically a reason you would not use this IRL. And you raise a valid point.

 

The easy way: remove freedom of choice.

 

For gamemodes like KOTH, the Slat-equipped vehicles could be more costly.

 

The way I see it, bis are implementing it as a means to counter all HEAT ammo, while IRL it is only designed to defeat the widely used RPG-7. Even against the RPG-7 it only has about 50% success ratio, because the RPG still has to hit between the slats. If the RPG hits the slat armor directly, the impact fuze will function as normal and the shaped charge will actually have more time to form into an even more efficient jet, increasing the RPG penetration. If the RPG hits between the slats, the nosecone is crushed, cutting the wires that connect the fuze to the detonator.

 

So it's not really a wonderful countermeasure, because most other HEAT warheads are designed so they will function even when hitting the slats, or between them. The effectiveness these warheads also gains a boost to penetration, due to the increased standoff distance provided by slat armor.

 

Alas, I can't imagine BIS going through all that trouble to simulate the differences of an RPG-7VL rocket vs all the other weapons. Therefore, it becomes more of a "must have" as anyone with a HEAT weapon will be at a slight disadvantage, and you as vehicle operator have no disadvantages.

 

If they did, however, only make it useful against low-tech HEAT weapons, such as RPG-7, and make modern HEAT weapons gain effectiveness against SLAT-equipped vehicles then you would use SLAT for asymmetrical urban/CQB combat only and ditch them when facing high-tech enemies.

 

Just mah two cents

just spit balling.

 

maybe make it so you had a penalty, being more time consuming to get out of a damaged vehicle that had the slats attached. 

 

vehicles with slats slower

 

vehicles with slats after they are damaged has harder time turning.

 

maybe some things to make it a decision rather than an instant go too.

 

again on the run so just spit balling. 

 

 

[scavenjer 112]

11 minutes ago, Strike_NOR said:

 

Well yes, theres technically a reason you would not use this IRL. And you raise a valid point.

 

The easy way: remove freedom of choice.

 

For gamemodes like KOTH, the Slat-equipped vehicles could be more costly.

 

The way I see it, bis are implementing it as a means to counter all HEAT ammo, while IRL it is only designed to defeat the widely used RPG-7. Even against the RPG-7 it only has about 50% success ratio, because the RPG still has to hit between the slats. If the RPG hits the slat armor directly, the impact fuze will function as normal and the shaped charge will actually have more time to form into an even more efficient jet, increasing the RPG penetration. If the RPG hits between the slats, the nosecone is crushed, cutting the wires that connect the fuze to the detonator.

 

So it's not really a wonderful countermeasure, because most other HEAT warheads are designed so they will function even when hitting the slats, or between them. The effectiveness these warheads also gains a boost to penetration, due to the increased standoff distance provided by slat armor.

 

Alas, I can't imagine BIS going through all that trouble to simulate the differences of an RPG-7VL rocket vs all the other weapons. Therefore, it becomes more of a "must have" as anyone with a HEAT weapon will be at a slight disadvantage, and you as vehicle operator have no disadvantages.

 

If they did, however, only make it useful against low-tech HEAT weapons, such as RPG-7, and make modern HEAT weapons gain effectiveness against SLAT-equipped vehicles then you would use SLAT for asymmetrical urban/CQB combat only and ditch them when facing high-tech enemies.

 

Just mah two cents

Actually while SLAT was designed to defeat RPGs it doesn't increase effectiveness off RPGs or HEAT weaponry at all.