Tanks - Armored vehicles customization

[lonewolf96 44]

If you guys feel like it it would be nice if you added the same green paintjob you have for the aaf recon tank to the kuma and other AAF vehicles. 

Thanks. 

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Seems there's a bone/selection overlap issue on the new SPG-9 equipped 4WD (AT) that makes the headrests shrink 50% towards the model centre, rather than hide completely when the customisation option to hide them, is checked.

Other 4WD variants including the LMG version, seem okay

 

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

Dev 1.81.144446

 

Rhino APC has camonet LOD issues. at close range (<20m) it is not visible

[jcae2798 132]

is there a way to spawn these vehicles with the new addons randomly?

 

For example:

[_VEH, RANDOM, nil] call bis_fnc_initVehicle;

 

I would hate to have a saved list of what the addons are for running the INIT on each vehicle.  Unless we can pull a list from Config and then randomselect?  Anyone willing to help me understand this?

 

EDIT:

BTW this does not work:

3) Randomize everything according to the config file result = [this, "", []] call bis_fnc_initVehicle; //<-- Prefered

[darkChozo 133]

The values for initVehicle are in the config under animationList and textureList. So you could use something like '  getArray (configFile >> "CfgVehicles" >> typeOf vehicle player >> "animationList") ' to access them. Also, the randomize everything command doesn't work because it uses the default randomization probabilities, which are zero for the animations that you're interested in.

 

Unrelatedly, I did some VR testing of the Rhino's ATGM, and it appears that it's range is 10.5km, or more specifically, I was able to hit a target at 10500m but not at 10550m. You can lock onto targets beyond the max range, but the projectile will despawn before impact. Additionally, it's pretty much confirmed that the direct attack mode is useless for long range missiling; even on a perfectly flat plane, the missile hit the ground well before hitting the target at those long ranges.

 

EDIT: Oh, one more thing, I think there might be some simulation of a tip detonator on the missile? Initially I was testing with a laser on a fairly oblique angle of the Kamish's armor, and the missile was getting to the target but seemingly despawning on impact. I then started going for side-on right angle shots and the missile actually detonated. This might be something that already existed, but I don't think I've seen anything like that before.

 

EDITmk2: Hah, I thought this was general discussion. Whoops.

[Bobrus 29]

It would be nice if all armored vehicles will have a chance to be "radomly customized" after spawn or at the beginning of the mission. 

[Belbo 462]

I wonder: is there any documentation on how to implement vehicles customization (even in its current vanilla form) in modded or simply retextured vehicles? I can't seem to find any.

[xxgetbuck123 945]

41 minutes ago, Belbo said:

I wonder: is there any documentation on how to implement vehicles customization (even in its current vanilla form) in modded or simply retextured vehicles? I can't seem to find any.

 

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Vehicle_Customization_(VhC)

 

Thats what I keep getting linked and also one of the Devs said this is how they did it. 

[2nd ranger 282]

For anyone who doesn't know, using setObjectTexture you can change the colour of the camo netting independently of the armour paint scheme (in the Virtual Garage you can't put a desert camo net on a jungle tank, for example).

 

For the Angara:

 

myTank animate ["showCamonetHull",1];

myTank setObjectTexture [2, "A3\Armor_F\Data\camonet_CSAT_Stripe_desert_CO.paa"]

 

HEX_Green

HEX_Desert

Stripe_Green

[R3vo 2654]

2 hours ago, 2nd ranger said:

For anyone who doesn't know, using setObjectTexture you can change the colour of the camo netting independently of the armour paint scheme (in the Virtual Garage you can't put a desert camo net on a jungle tank, for example).

 

For the Angara:

 

myTank animate ["showCamonetHull",1];

myTank setObjectTexture [2, "A3\Armor_F\Data\camonet_CSAT_Stripe_desert_CO.paa"]

 

HEX_Green

HEX_Desert

Stripe_Green

That's a weird design decision. Let the one who builds the mission decide what camou the net should have independently from the body paint.

[lexx 1363]

I guess it's because of the way the textures are defined. If you want to allow every camo texture for every tank texture, you have to create a shitton of data entries.

[R3vo 2654]

4 minutes ago, lexx said:

I guess it's because of the way the textures are defined. If you want to allow every camo texture for every tank texture, you have to create a shitton of data entries.

Fair enough, I thought it was independent.

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

Dev 1.83.144462

 

o_t_apc_wheeled_02_rcws_v2_ghex_f

o_apc_wheeled_02_rcws_v2_f

 

still need proper customization of appearance. 

 

livery (for the ghex variant), and also simple object hidden selections (clan and zasleh)

 

 

Rhino camonet has LOD issues at close range

[comp_uter15776 1]

Not sure if already mentioned, but (ver 1.83.144462):

 

1. Edit AMV-7 appearance
2. Turn on all components
3. Turn off all components
4. Some netting remains on the autocannon?

 

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

For gameplay, maybe vehicles with camonet applied are not shown on Datalink, if their engine is also off and a few other conditions

[meowcat 7]

10 minutes ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

For gameplay, maybe vehicles with camonet applied are not shown on Datalink, if their engine is also off and a few other conditions

I would disagree, especially in multiplayer, whether you see the vehicle should depend if you as a player can actually see it.

[SuicideKing 233]

1 hour ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

For gameplay, maybe vehicles with camonet applied are not shown on Datalink, if their engine is also off and a few other conditions

They're supposed to hide the thermal signature of the vehicle somewhat, but i'm not sure how sensitive the visual and IR sensors are supposed to be.

[Strike_NOR 898]

15 minutes ago, SuicideKing said:

For gameplay, maybe vehicles with camonet applied are not shown on Datalink, if their engine is also off and a few other conditions

 

1 hour ago, meowcat said:

I would disagree, especially in multiplayer, whether you see the vehicle should depend if you as a player can actually see it.

 

15 minutes ago, SuicideKing said:

They're supposed to hide the thermal signature of the vehicle somewhat, but i'm not sure how sensitive the visual and IR sensors are supposed to be.

 

Allright guys. You all have some ideas about this, and they are good, but I'll try to shed some light on the advantages of camo nets, by most usefulness at top:

 

1. They reduce contrast in the visual light spectrum. This means that not only the mk.1 eyeball has a harder time spotting it, but also any contrast-seeking device (mostly outdated tech).
2. They can reduce contrast in the infra-red spectrum. Camo nets are subject to keeping temperatures close to ambient temperatures, making them blend with the environment, however this doesn't mean much if the vehicle beneath is generating a lot of heat. Soon enough, the camo net will also heat up, and any gap in the camo netting pattern will let through some IR-light. Essentially, it helps a little bit.
3. They can be made of radar-absorbing materials. This will reduce the amount of radar energy reflected by the target.
4. They can dampen sound. Depending on camo net type, they can absorb some of the sound generated by the target, making it harder to hear at distances.

 

How could these nets work in ArmA, except make it more difficult for the player to visually see it? (Basically not only serve as an aesthetic gimmick?)

 

With the 'new' sensors suite, camo nets could (technically speaking) reduce the "target size" (how easy it is to detect) roughly like this:

 

1. Heavy reduction in visual sensor target size - (maybe exception on roads - where they actually stand out quite well)
2. Slight reduction in Infra-Red sensor target size - (make the target stay hidden until the seeker is closer than usual.)
3. Slight reduction in radar target size (same as for IR)
4. Reduce volume of vehicle slightly.

 

However, and here's a big IF, this would require a link between camo net presence (equipped or not), coverage (turret/hull and damage states) and then tie it to the vehicle sensor "cross section"/target size for all of the aforementioned sensor types.

 

That sounds like a lot of work to me - so I don't know if it is even possible at all, but it would be nice as it would affect the way AI "sees" their enemies too, or rather.. don't see them :)  :p

[da12thMonkey 1943]

2 hours ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

For gameplay, maybe vehicles with camonet applied are not shown on Datalink, if their engine is also off and a few other conditions

Vehicle appearing on friendly datalink you mean?

Blue Force Tracking works by sharing GPS coordinates over a network. It's a separate system to sensors so camnets shouldn't affect it. Engine on/off maybe should depending if the communications system is running on the battery/APU power or not.

AFAIK Enemy vehicles only show on the datalink display while another vehicle in the network, has tracked them with sensors anyway. And are thus transmitting the coordinates of that enemy vehicle to friendly vehicles in the network. So again if the receiving vehicle is still linked to the coms network, it'll still receive information on the battlefield management system even if its own weapon system is idling.

[Hvymtal 1251]

11 hours ago, comp_uter15776 said:

Not sure if already mentioned, but (ver 1.83.144462):

 

1. Edit AMV-7 appearance
2. Turn on all components
3. Turn off all components
4. Some netting remains on the autocannon?

(Image shows camouflage netting remaining on the Marshall's gun mantlet despite the component being disabled and the rest of the turret's camouflage netting having been removed)

 

I've successfully reproduced the issue

Made a ticket: https://feedback.bistudio.com/T127927

I didn't know the Marshall had a bush. I'm not sure how I feel about that

[comp_uter15776 1]

On 3/14/2018 at 1:11 AM, Hvymtal said:

I've successfully reproduced the issue

Made a ticket: https://feedback.bistudio.com/T127927

I didn't know the Marshall had a bush. I'm not sure how I feel about that

Just noted the Panther has the same issue with the camo netting around the skirt armour too.

[Mckinnon 2]

So Slammer UP had its 120mm cannon back. But NOT visually. You can compare Slammer and Slammer UP cannons in Virtual Garage. It's still smaller. :)

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

8 hours ago, Mckinnon said:

So Slammer UP had its 120mm cannon back. But NOT visually. You can compare Slammer and Slammer UP cannons in Virtual Garage. It's still smaller. :)

 

they did a cheap tweak to cut off post-release complaints of P2W in koth/pvp/tvt modes. giving every vehicle the big gun and stronger coax.

 

it made sense for me that the UP tank with the smaller diameter cannon and better armor, would have a smaller shell, both from visual and also game balance paradigm

[the_one_and_only_Venator 162]

12 hours ago, Mckinnon said:

So Slammer UP had its 120mm cannon back. But NOT visually. You can compare Slammer and Slammer UP cannons in Virtual Garage. It's still smaller. :)

 

Well, you may also notice that the Slammer's 120 mm cannon fits inside the inner diameter of the Kuma's 120 mm cannon. So don't be too exact about that... XD

[Jnr4817 215]

Is there anyway to get this to function in game. Much like Grumphy's loadout editor.

 

It would be nice to customize your vehicle for different types of missions.