Jump to content
 EO

Arma 3 DLC - CONTACT

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, ISparkle said:

And you definitely won't stop Russians and their satelite states from rolling you over without MBTs and Air Force that can hold the ground imo.

That isn't true. AT Ambushes are effective. Finland pulled off amazing work during WW2 and Chechyna wrecked like an entire Tank battalion in Grozny. Mujhadeen messed them up in Afghanistan. You don't need tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

clearly a new age approach.......

fantastic from greenfistD-tUxPzWkAEjeVX?format=jpg&name=medium

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2019 at 3:07 AM, Ex3B said:

Basically, I want to see F-35s. They exist in the Armaverse (Arma 2, in service long before real life; references/a comparison to the F-35 program in the Xian's description), and should surely still be in service. The black wasp is slow compared to the Shikra, has a terrible IR sensor, doesn't win in a dogfight. The terrible IR sensor of the black wasp, and stealth attributes of the shik and BW mean that the shikra will detect a BW at 5km on IR, and 5.2 KM on radar. Result: The shik has no use for its radar when hunting BWs. The BW will have to go around shining its radar, giving away its position from a long way off, while the faster SHik can maneuver around and get an IR lock undetected.

NATO needs a better air superiority fighter. Now... a F-35 is about the same speed as a F/A-18 - although the BW is a f-18/f-22 hybrid, so I guess the BW should be faster and more maneuverable, but an F-35 with better sensors and stealth would be good for balance, and would make a lot of sense for the type of craft you'd send to keep an eye on Ayyyy lmaos.

I'm pretty certain that this was game balancing -- while you're right about the Shikra's own detection ranges, the BW2 can detect the Shikra at 3 km on IR (2.5 km for the BW2's IR sensor x 1.2 for the Shikra's irTargetSize value) and even the Shikra (Stealth) can be detected at 9 km by the BW2's (15 km for BW's radar x 0.6 for Shikra (Stealth)'s radarTargetSize value), while the in-game AMRAAM-D's 1 km range advantage is paired with wider fields of regard for its sensor (100° vs. 65°) and its initial/maintaining lock cones (140° vs. 90°) vs. the R-77. (The AMRAAM-D has cmimmunity=0.97500002; to the R-77's cmimmunity=0.97000003; but I'm not sure how relevant that is.)

On 7/3/2019 at 7:06 AM, Glow said:

I don't see reason why Livonian shouldn't have an A-143 Buzzard in stock. Not sure about Livonian history, but if we assume that they had strong economic connections with CSAT in the past, it would be ok to see To-199 Neophron in Livonian/NATO liveries (and readjusted to use NATO missiles). Confusing? That's good - more fun.

I'd agree regarding the A-143 (IRL the Lithuanian Air Force had a L-39ZA in recent years) but go further with the To-199 Neophron: don't just "readjust" with BLUFOR missiles, but also both include an active radar and undo Bohemia's post-Jets changes to the CSAT Neophron's flight performance so that the LDF's 'air-to-air Neophron' could at least take on the A-149 Gryphon even if it can't match the Shikra. (See the "fighter attack" version of the M-346 including the Grifo-346 radar (archive link).)

On 7/4/2019 at 4:10 AM, Ex3B said:

Are you kidding me??? weaker than Syndicate? Syndicate has no armored vehicles, no air forces, no AA launchers,  no AT launchers aside from RPG-7s, no marksmen/sniper rifles, no helmets, and no armor stronger than a tac vest.

From what we've seen, the LDF has plate carriers, helmets with face guards, a pretty advanced 6.5mm rifle series including marksmen variants, and tracked APCs with autocannons (they've shown Mora's reskinned with LDF camo). Their description states they've got a not-insignificant air force as well.

I just checked dev branch and both the FIA and Syndikat lean on FFV (Assault Boat, Truck, and Van Transport) and technicals. Syndikat's MB 4WD gives the advantage of front-seat FFV over the FIA's Offroad while the Offroad (HMG) has higher-caliber ammo than the MB 4WD (LMG); Syndikat also has the RHIB, the Caesar BTT, and the M-900 (albeit the aircraft don't have FFV) while the FIA has the Fuel Truck, Offroad (Repair), and Mk6 Mortar.

As for the LDF though, so far in-game the renamed/reskinned Mora (FV-720 Odyniec) is the sole LDF armor and the renamed/reskinned Hellcat (WY-55 Czapla) their sole aircraft, with currently-identical loadout options; for fixed-wing see my above suggestion regarding fixed-wing.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jakerod said:

That isn't true. AT Ambushes are effective. Finland pulled off amazing work during WW2 and Chechyna wrecked like an entire Tank battalion in Grozny. Mujhadeen messed them up in Afghanistan. You don't need tanks.

I don't think so. You have to remember those were very much a result of tactical blunders on Russian/Soviet part in the environments with lots of covers for infantry to utilize. A tank supporting infantry in those same environment will be far deadlier than the tanks rolling into such environment without infantry covering it. Also, on Finland vs Soviet Union case, WW2 tanks =/= modern day/future tanks and tank tactics back then =/= modern day. And on top of that, it was also a Soviet army's inexperience that allowed Finns to do such. Once the Soviets learned, the things went differently. Especially considering that Livonia is landlocked, having an armor asset beyond an IFV would be logical as IFV's primary role is to combat infantry, not go on tank hunting. And infantry + tank combo complements each other in that tank takes care of armored and some infantry threats while infantry takes care of threats tank might face. Very difficult for any real military force to handle just with infantry force unless you are basically relying on a chance of enemy's tactical blunders to happen. Only real way for Livonia to stop tanks with just infantry and IFVs would be to establish air superiority which is impossible for them as they don't have fixed wing aircraft as of now. Livonia is defo weaker than AAF as is. Not that I am complaining or anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Syndikat have 4WD AT.

LDF weakest than Syndikat... maybe not in general, but when I face two fire teams again each other - Syndikat and LDF (NATO build), Syndikat won tournament.

Motorized teams get little better 'cos Mora armor and fast gun, but once you let Syndikat use hit-and-run tactic with 4WD AT car shooting from a distance... LDF looks bad. Yes, I know they have helicopters and artillery...

 

I made some tests, here is a video from Fire Teams battles:

I'm not trying to make any point here, just testing some theories.

 

I took NATO Rifle Fire Team, dress up in LDF stuff 'cos I need LDF to be NATO for tests against Syndikate, AFF and FIA (all INDFOR). Basically is a copy of LDF Rifle Fire Team for NATO.

 

Here you can watch:

 

1 - test battle against LDF to confirm that my NATO LDF build Rifle Fire Team and LDF Rifle Fire Team, both are equal. Same members on the same positions, same hierarchy for team leaders and others team members, same inventory, etc.

 

2 - LDF vs Syndicate Paramilitary Combat Squad (bunch of guys with AK47) Some battles with changing skill experience levels: 20% (not included in video) / 50% / 100%.

 

There are many variables here... maybe too many to take this as serious test. But when LDF army rifle team, armed with newest, fancy looking Promet rifles loosing over and over with "bunch of guys armed with old AK47s"... something is realy wrong here... or meybe not. How you think?

 

All this is in VR, open space. So... Syndicate should theoretically be in a lost position here - they not wearing any armor! LDF do. Now about AK47 vs Promed 6.5mm... yeah... I'm not going through this. Comparing and balancing 2039 rifle with a rifle from 1949... is good for game or bad for immersion? How do you think guys?

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jakerod said:

That isn't true. AT Ambushes are effective. Finland pulled off amazing work during WW2 and Chechyna wrecked like an entire Tank battalion in Grozny. Mujhadeen messed them up in Afghanistan. You don't need tanks.

Yeah, and during Phantom Fury, tanks or IFV such as Abrams and Bradley were really useful - in urban combat moreover!

 

So yes, you do need tanks ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The specnaz helmet shares the same UV map with CSAT helmet?
I hope so

5orrlx.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, chortles said:

I'm pretty certain that this was game balancing -- while you're right about the Shikra's own detection ranges, the BW2 can detect the Shikra at 3 km on IR (2.5 km for the BW2's IR sensor x 1.2 for the Shikra's irTargetSize value) and even the Shikra (Stealth) can be detected at 9 km by the BW2's (15 km for BW's radar x 0.6 for Shikra (Stealth)'s radarTargetSize value), while the in-game AMRAAM-D's 1 km range advantage is paired with wider fields of regard for its sensor (100° vs. 65°) and its initial/maintaining lock cones (140° vs. 90°) vs. the R-77. (The AMRAAM-D has cmimmunity=0.97500002; to the R-77's cmimmunity=0.97000003; but I'm not sure how relevant that is.)

...

As for the LDF though, so far in-game the renamed/reskinned Mora (FV-720 Odyniec) is the sole LDF armor and the renamed/reskinned Hellcat (WY-55 Czapla) their sole aircraft, with currently-identical loadout options;

Balancing discussion aside, storywise, there should be high level air assets for a training exercise OR (and this is an AND) especially an Alien contact scenario. NATO  (presumably, unless stated otherwise, and even if so, they *should* be doing it), and would at least be doing an air policing mission. For the story, NATO jets should be there, and the carrier based BW doesn't belong.

 

I'm fine with the LDF not having more than IFVs, but they should have something with AT missiles at least, even if its a reskinned prowler or offroad.

 

As for balance comments, in spoiler since its off topic:

Spoiler

I think they had gameplay and/or balance in mind when they did that, but I think they ended up with poor balance.

Lets take a stealth vs stealth fight, both hunting for each other.

The Shik might as well turn its radar off, +200m detection range is not worth it. Thus the BW will see the Shike from 9km away in a narrow cone, and be able to lock, while the shik will see the BW coming from 16km away on its RWR. With speed on its side, it can decide to engage or not.

If it decides to engages head to head, it has a 3.8km detection gap to close. The BW must be fliying at the shik due ot the radar cone, so we can assume a closure rate in excess of 2,000 km/h, ie greater than 555 m/s. The BW has less than 6.85 seconds to lock and start firing missiles before the Shik does the same. Both sides will spam countermeasures on the first pass. If it goes beyond that first pass, the shik's superior acceleration will let it will a dogfight.

The BW's gimped IR sensor means it needs to use radar, which means the enemy will know its flying around. The faster Shik, with almsot no reason to use its radar, will be able to decide to engage or not, and if it comes from the side, that 3.8km detection range advantage is nullified, and it can start launching IR missiles before the BW knows what its got itself into.

 

Of course, this is a combined arms game, we shouldn't just consider 1v1.

How about SEAD missions? Shik has 1 internal ARM, so is better at that (sure, the detection range advantage of a stealth shik over non stealth BW is smaller than between a stealth shik vs stealth BW, but ground targets might as well be stationary). Non stealth its 3 vs 2 ARMs. Shik's better at this too. It can do SEAD while in its stealth config

 

How about tank busting? again the shik wins here, thanks to the BW's gimped IR sensor. Its really hard to get locks with Macers due to the gimped IR sensor +normal flying speed, and they aren't internally carried. 

 

About the only thing the BW wins is LGB support with its SDB loadout

 

 

17 hours ago, Glow said:

Syndikat have 4WD AT.

LDF weakest than Syndikat... maybe not in general, but when I face two fire teams again each other - Syndikat and LDF (NATO build), Syndikat won tournament.Motorized teams get little better 'cos Mora armor and fast gun, but once you let Syndikat use hit-and-run tactic with 4WD AT car shooting from a distance... LDF looks bad. Yes, I know they have helicopters and artillery...

Does one AT rocket from the offroad even take out a mora? Good luck with hit an run when the more has thermal imaging, and that autocannon has a much longer effective range than the spg-9. Are you seriously claiming a technical is better than an IFV? We may also see offroad ATs for LDF, LDF at least have offroads, and a simple set texture command will solve the gap if they don't have it standard.

 

Also, your video seems like you start the rifle squads really close. The 7.62x39mm round may be favorable at close distances.

Also, AI can be dumb at times. I think you'd get different results if you ran that test with human players (with randomized teams, enough times that player skill isn't the deciding factor).

 

Plate carriers have more ballistic protection than the tac vests. A helmet is better than no helmet.

The only explanation is that the syndicate weapon fire is more effective. So either the gun is worse, or the gun is worse in AI hands.

Also one last thing, there are difficulty settings that change friendly and enemy AI skill, are you sure this had no effect?

 

Have you ran the similation with mismatched skill? I saw one test with each side at 50:50 skill, and NATO/LDF won handily. AI behavior is changing the outcome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ex3B said:

Balancing discussion aside, storywise, there should be high level air assets for a training exercise OR (and this is an AND) especially an Alien contact scenario. NATO  (presumably, unless stated otherwise, and even if so, they *should* be doing it), and would at least be doing an air policing mission. For the story, NATO jets should be there, and the carrier based BW doesn't belong.

 

I'm fine with the LDF not having more than IFVs, but they should have something with AT missiles at least, even if its a reskinned prowler or offroad.

 

As for balance comments, in spoiler since its off topic:

  Reveal hidden contents

I think they had gameplay and/or balance in mind when they did that, but I think they ended up with poor balance.

Lets take a stealth vs stealth fight, both hunting for each other.

The Shik might as well turn its radar off, +200m detection range is not worth it. Thus the BW will see the Shike from 9km away in a narrow cone, and be able to lock, while the shik will see the BW coming from 16km away on its RWR. With speed on its side, it can decide to engage or not.

If it decides to engages head to head, it has a 3.8km detection gap to close. The BW must be fliying at the shik due ot the radar cone, so we can assume a closure rate in excess of 2,000 km/h, ie greater than 555 m/s. The BW has less than 6.85 seconds to lock and start firing missiles before the Shik does the same. Both sides will spam countermeasures on the first pass. If it goes beyond that first pass, the shik's superior acceleration will let it will a dogfight.

The BW's gimped IR sensor means it needs to use radar, which means the enemy will know its flying around. The faster Shik, with almsot no reason to use its radar, will be able to decide to engage or not, and if it comes from the side, that 3.8km detection range advantage is nullified, and it can start launching IR missiles before the BW knows what its got itself into.

 

Of course, this is a combined arms game, we shouldn't just consider 1v1.

How about SEAD missions? Shik has 1 internal ARM, so is better at that (sure, the detection range advantage of a stealth shik over non stealth BW is smaller than between a stealth shik vs stealth BW, but ground targets might as well be stationary). Non stealth its 3 vs 2 ARMs. Shik's better at this too. It can do SEAD while in its stealth config

 

How about tank busting? again the shik wins here, thanks to the BW's gimped IR sensor. Its really hard to get locks with Macers due to the gimped IR sensor +normal flying speed, and they aren't internally carried. 

 

About the only thing the BW wins is LGB support with its SDB loadout

 

 

Does one AT rocket from the offroad even take out a mora? Good luck with hit an run when the more has thermal imaging, and that autocannon has a much longer effective range than the spg-9. Are you seriously claiming a technical is better than an IFV? We may also see offroad ATs for LDF, LDF at least have offroads, and a simple set texture command will solve the gap if they don't have it standard.

 

Also, your video seems like you start the rifle squads really close. The 7.62x39mm round may be favorable at close distances.

Also, AI can be dumb at times. I think you'd get different results if you ran that test with human players (with randomized teams, enough times that player skill isn't the deciding factor).

 

Plate carriers have more ballistic protection than the tac vests. A helmet is better than no helmet.

The only explanation is that the syndicate weapon fire is more effective. So either the gun is worse, or the gun is worse in AI hands.

Also one last thing, there are difficulty settings that change friendly and enemy AI skill, are you sure this had no effect?

 

Have you ran the similation with mismatched skill? I saw one test with each side at 50:50 skill, and NATO/LDF won handily. AI behavior is changing the outcome

There is another point about why ATGMs on An IFV are overestimated...and thats doctrine. In a defense doctrine you used that IFV to trasnport Infantry and the IFV is indeed more of an APC....what you would have to fear is the hard to detect ATGM Infantry surrounding that APC in a defensice Position. And there are indeed a lot of smaller armed forces (baltic states) that use this defensive doctrine of APC + ATGM teams...simply because they can't afford a fleet of modern MBTs but have already abandoned the old inherited soviet types.

 

have a look at Estonian Military...thats in RL pretty much what LDF is in contact.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonian_Defence_Forces#Land_Forces

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Beagle said:

Tehre is another poitn about why ATGMs on An IFV are overestimated...and thats doctrine.

...

have a look at Estonian Military...thats in RL pretty much what LDF is in contact.

As a counterpoint, M2 Bradley's have made good use of their TOW missiles, with many T-72 tanks and such destroyed by them.

Also, in the maps they've released, Livonia is between poland and lithuania. They use the polish language, and a polish rifle, so I'd look more towards poland or somewhere between poland and lithuania.

 

Besides, tiny Altis got Leopard IIs and Gripens. Arma/OFP has always had excessively strong military presences for the size of the nation's fighting. I'd say its because they can't feasibly make the terrains bigger.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ex3B said:

As a counterpoint, M2 Bradley's have made good use of their TOW missiles, with many T-72 tanks and such destroyed by them.

Also, in the maps they've released, Livonia is between poland and lithuania. They use the polish language, and a polish rifle, so I'd look more towards poland or somewhere between poland and lithuania.

 

Besides, tiny Altis got Leopard IIs and Gripens. Arma/OFP has always had excessively strong military presences for the size of the nation's fighting. I'd say its because they can't feasibly make the terrains bigger.

 

Everything with Thermal Imaging and missile on it looks good in a desert... things don't work that way when you can use dense vegetation to stay out of sight and break contact anytime. Aspects of conbat procedures that are already proven to work in ArmA III on Tanoa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

please BI adds the warlord from A2 NAPA to the looters 

iff_inf_napa.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@zukov: you do realize the DLC is out in less than a month?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, haleks said:

@zukov: you do realize the DLC is out in less than a month?

maybe they are planning after the release..... the character fit very well in livonia 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bradley destroying T-72s and MBTs in the field is most likely the result of the army it faced wasn't really of quality and didn't have good field tactics. That and the questionable quality armies do not field good export versions as they tend to strip stuffs down even after the producing companies removing some techs. Even if LDF won't come with MBTs and jets, thanks to modders, LDF will be expanded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway thanks BI!
with the new LDF faction  characters and  .p3D models  we will able to build an entire new army, just with a configuration files
edit 
the cloud skin from project argo are quite good for Corporations faction.....

argo-level-editor.jpg

ss_2c09caf8c268aff25efba0c19eaa8fb9afa8b

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2019 at 9:30 AM, zukov said:

Anyway thanks BI!
with the new LDF faction  characters and  .p3D models  we will able to build an entire new army, just with a configuration files
edit 
the cloud skin from project argo are quite good for Corporations faction.....


 

Hey, how did you get these skins in Arma 3?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the term DLC here, it is an expansion pack. Expansion packs include much more content than DLC. Look at Arma 3 Apex for instance. New campaign, new game modes, new in-game videos and voice acting, many, many new weapons and new locations and game styles etc. DLC is usually small additional content within an already existing environment. People confuse regular DLC and major expansion packs these days like they mix up RTS with RTT.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to  @Glow  for this stunning and gorgeous images the PVP endgame mode with this assets is mandatory!

D8nMZlcWwAAc5Kb.jpg:large

D8pFAzOXYAARhKm.jpg:large

D7VZwveW0AIMKf0.jpg

D-e7OXkXYAAqQqe.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×