Prarie Fire discussion

[Ex3B 266]

I'm surprised that there's no discussion thread for the Prarie Fire DLC yet.

 

My thoughts:

Generally speaking, looks awesome. The setting and the groups they follow seem like there could be some nice stories/missions.

 

Multi/singleplayer balance: I'm (personally) a bit concerned about the MP focus, because I simply do not have sufficient time to set aside for large co-op missions or such. Apex protocol missions and KOTH are the limit for the time I can devote to multiplayer. OTOH, 14 player coop campaigns do sound awesome for those that actually can do them.

 

The Map: I've only seen small screencaps of the overall layout, but it seems to be like Chernarus, with the north west border being land, and south and eastern borders being sea. Generally, I like this configuration much more than landlocked maps, and one does get more land area from this configuration (for the same grid size) than an island map.

My concern is that it is a fictional terrain (as opposed to a terrain derived from real world data like altis, stratis, tanoa, chernarus, etc), and many fictional terrains simply do not look natural... the geopgraphy is... off.

They are trying to pack in many different types of terrain to represent many different relevant areas from the Vietnam war, I hope that they manage to pack all that in without it looking un-natural - but it is a concern I have.

 

The vehicles: The F-4 Phantom looks awesome, I never realized how much I wanted one...

The light tanks are awesome, with Vehicle Interiors!!! (something Global Mobilization was lacking)

 

I fear that some content that would complement its assets is lacking, and thus it will need to be compatible (ie balanced) with other Arma mods or DLCs.

The F-4 should naturally have a Mig-21 or Mig-17 available to the opposing side - even if it never factors into the missions/campaign, it would be great for user created stuff in the editor

The F-4 has the option of navy colors, and thus naturally I hope it comes with a hook and is carrier capable. Compatibility with the USS Freedom is, IMO, a must. A Kittyhawk or Forrestal class aircraft carrier would be great... simply because they'd open up a lot of possibilities in the editor, but using an ananchronistic USS freedom wouldn't be too big of a deal.

 

Creator DLC musings: This CDLC is temporally close to the Global Mobilization CDLC. Many of the weapons and vehicles are simply redundant between them. I wish there were steps taken to reduce this redundancy. We don't need every CDLC to have its own version of an AK/M16, or in this case even more obscure vehicles like an Mi-2.

 

 

[Cochise333 18]

Seriously hoping for an AFM to the helos🙏. Global Mobilization has done well in this area in my 'personal' opinion, would love for PRAIRIE FIRE to also include this.

[zukov 490]

is an amazing CDLC ! I agree with Ex3b the mig 21 is mandatory like the m113 and btr60/152 /m46 artillery, but i'm sure there are adding soon
but finally i can recreate the entire BF Vietnam for the PVP multiplayer! The first will be Operation hastings (old version with more riverways).

[semiconductor 309]

Vietnam theme has been done to death a hundred of times already (on a related note, Fortunate Son in particular should be considered a hallmark of a poor taste). The only saving grace for the DLC (and Arma in general, it's hopelessly outdated in evey aspect) will be new game mechanics and/or focus on niche but interesting aspect of the war.

 

Otherwise it will be yet another attempt of putting lipstick on a pig.

[Callsign 128]

21 hours ago, Ex3B said:

I'm surprised that there's no discussion thread for the Prarie Fire DLC yet.

This surprised me too when it was announced. I almost made a thread but decided against - well done! 😛

I'm also concerned about the MP/SP balance. I'm hoping these campaign missions will be decent enough in length for SP. Reviews so far seem promising though.

I didn't realise the terrain was fictional 😞
 

26 minutes ago, semiconductor said:

The only saving grace for the DLC (and Arma in general, it's hopelessly outdated in evey aspect) will be new game mechanics and/or focus on niche but interesting aspect of the war.

 

Otherwise it will be yet another attempt of putting lipstick on a pig.

My first thought was - I wonder how they've dealt with performance. I really hope BIS pull something out of the bag if they're hoping Arma 3 is going to be around for a long time, otherwise it's going to handicap these new CDLCs.

[ANZACSAS Steven 395]

The choppers look like they are the old CSJ uh1's from OFP, the CH-34 looks to be the same as the OFP version aswell.Both too outdated for UNSUNG imho.Not really impressive mod DLC.

[zukov 490]

3 hours ago, Callsign said:

I didn't realise the terrain was fictional

i saw the HUE imperial palace

[EO 11275]

23 hours ago, Ex3B said:

I'm surprised that there's no discussion thread for the Prarie Fire DLC yet.

 

1 hour ago, Callsign said:

This surprised me too when it was announced. I almost made a thread but decided against - well done! 😛

 

Probably because this forum is sadly becoming an after-thought, while information has been shared freely on Discord since it was announced a week ago.

 

 

[NightIntruder 710]

On 4/12/2021 at 4:21 PM, Ex3B said:

I'm surprised that there's no discussion thread for the Prarie Fire DLC yet.

Actually, there was one attempt of discussion a few days ago, wasn't went good, here: 

If I ever had wishes concerning this CDLC, I wouldn't express a single one. The reason for this is quite simple - people behind this DLC are here for ages and are one of the most experienced Arma mod makers ever. They've been developing UNSUNG mod for years I suppose and know exactly what they want to achieve through the DLC release and how. If there are no signs of Russian jets, there has to be a reason for that, this is not only someone's whim. Perhaps, it's just a lack of time, or maybe a lack of funds. If there is no new game mechanics, well surely they have discussed it thoroughly with BI staff and would hear that no resources are available for redoing assets for being adjusted to said mechanics. Even, if it's changed and this DLC will bring some new exciting things, devs will know better what they need to complement the NAM world they brought to us, as they have that big picture we are lacking. Phantom jets, for instance, do they fly from aircraft carriers only? No! How does it change the way of developing mod? In an obvious way - there's no need for an aircraft carrier of that era, and a map with access to waters. You just need a concrete runway of an appropriate lenght.
We have our own wishes connected to the way we like to play this game which doesn't really matter at the end of the day when it comes to this DLC.

[zukov 490]

Why most people are so negative about CDLC?  if you look on GM is made with passion and love (i bought just for tpz fuchs) SOG idem! in all CDLC you have a unique assets that not recognizable in any game! 24 euro is a cheap price. With iron curtain CZ we will have a HUge amount of assets for any scenario that we want.
look this image you have this in any other AAA games? ok for the gameplay but a good sector control is more than suffice

[Ex3B 266]

On 4/13/2021 at 2:49 PM, zukov said:

i saw the HUE imperial palace

 

Its my understanding that they will have real places in there, but with the overall terrain being fictional, to pack all the relevant locations and types of terrain into just 300km

[Corvinus 35]

Since the campaign isn't about North Vietnamese, I'm not interested. Would've liked to play as a good guy for once.

 

 

[zukov 490]

 

[Ex3B 266]

5 hours ago, Corvinus said:

Since the campaign isn't about North Vietnamese, I'm not interested.

They have at least 1 missions from the side of the PAVN.

 

5 hours ago, Corvinus said:

Would've liked to play as a good guy for once.

Also, lets not be juvenile... "good guys" and "bad guys" oversimplifies things greatly.

 

In a fictional setting, the "good guys" can be whoever you want. Arma 3: APEX/old Man: CSAT bad, clearly.

Arma 3 East wind and laws of war: CSAT bad, maybe? but Miller is also probably bad?

Arma 3: Contact: Russians good-ish, Livonians bad.

So "for once" ignores that fictional conflicts in fictional countries have clearly had you playing as the good guy... unless you simply can't accept anything other than Americans = Bad.

 

Now in the Vietnam war... that's real life, and real life is complicated.

MACV-SOG operations in Laos and Cambodia = Illegal = bad?

PAVN operations in Laos and Cambodia = Illegal = bad?

MACV-SOG was responding to the illegal actions of the Ho Chi Minh trial, so... "they started it, they are more bad"?

 

Or are you referring to the US being involved at all?

It all started with a mess that the French made. The elections in both the north and the south after the french left were both rigged (98% and 99% wins... yea... right...)

The North started a guerilla war in the south... bad

The American's supported a corrupt and incompetent de facto dictator in the south.. bad

Then they supported the removal of that dictator in a coup... bad?

Then the war expanded, and got ugly, as wars do, particularly when one side hides among civilians.

 

As long as the portrayal is not Americans = good, VC/PAVN = bad; as long as it portrays the complexity of the situation and fairly portrays the views/motivation of each side, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

 

17 hours ago, zukov said:

Why most people are so negative about CDLC?  

Well, I have concerns about inconsistency (they don't fit so well in terms of balance with other vanilla/DLC assets), and as I said, redundancy...

How many independent versions of the AK/M-16 or Mi-2 do we need. It would be nice if they could share some assets across them for optimization. Instead, each CDLC seems to be stand-alone, which is a bit limiting if they don't mesh well with other content.

That's not to say they are bad, just a cause for concern.

[ebud 18]

I think this looks absolutely fantastic. I have been waiting for a SOG game forever and went back and bought Elite Warriors: Vietnam a couple of years ago since the campaign was actually fun even though the graphics are old. I think focusing on a small part of the conflict and trying to do it well is way better than trying to cover every single branch of every service on all sides. From the screenshots it still looks like they are going to broad in scope but that's just me. Also the MP focus will be lost on me, I am SP only kinda player. Man, I still cannot wait.

[ANZACSAS Steven 395]

Hey Ebud!!

Thanks for all your work.If it wasnt for you early pioneers we wouldnt even have NAM mods!

Good to see you still poking around.:)

I'am all for CDLC's.

 

 

[ebud 18]

1 hour ago, ANZACSAS Steven said:

Hey Ebud!!

Thanks for all your work.If it wasnt for you early pioneers we wouldnt even have NAM mods!

Good to see you still poking around.:)

I'am all for CDLC's.

 

 

Yeah, thanks,  I remember what a time suck creating and modding was (haven't touched it in about 10 years lol), I can't imagine the scope of work it took to get this made. If it had more SP missions/campaigns it would be amazing. I hate relying on other people for anything 🙂  

 

[stburr91 1002]

I don't know if any of the developers are reading this thread, but I was wonder about something. 

 

It says on the Recommended Specs section on the Steam page of the CDLC that it requires 75 GB of free hard drive space. Is that just the CDLC, or does that 75 GB include the base game as well?

[General Kong 148]

asked the question on the official discord, and they confirmed that the 75gb thing is both the base game and SOG PF, the CDLC itself should be about 24-ish gigs in size

[NightIntruder 710]

52 minutes ago, General Kong said:

the CDLC itself should be about 24-ish gigs in size

The 24 gigs of pleasure. Cannot wait!

[ebud 18]

Is there anyone around here that can speak to the SP viability of this DLC? I mean I will get it, but from what I read the only SP portion is a few familiarization missions?  The campaign is co-op but can you play much of anything in SP? I haven't played ARMA in nearly a decade and all my old OFP/ARMA/VBS1 buddies have moved on so finding and fitting into a MP group would be some work. I am just hoping for more SP than what I am seeing in on the site/list/

 

[zukov 490]

not bad heheh

[Beagle 684]

After what happend to the handdling of CDLC in game classing it as a mod, im not going to buy one again. I play ArmA games for multiplayer only since ArmA II, and the CDLC servers for GM where dead from the start.I bought GM in expectation for at least some strategical cold war Multiplayer action (warfare, at least warlords like)... there was none, and the SIngle palyer was rather bland. I don't get fooled twice.

[stburr91 1002]

9 hours ago, Beagle said:

After what happend to the handdling of CDLC in game classing it as a mod, im not going to buy one again. I play ArmA games for multiplayer only since ArmA II, and the CDLC servers for GM where dead from the start.I bought GM in expectation for at least some strategical cold war Multiplayer action (warfare, at least warlords like)... there was none, and the SIngle palyer was rather bland. I don't get fooled twice.

 

That's the downside of trying to keep an 8 year old game alive. The truth is that Arma 3 has become a zombie, it isn't dead, but it isn't alive either. 

 

I know that I'm not going to get as much use out of this CDLC as say the Apex expansion, but $23 isn't a lot of money, and this CDLC looks really good, so I will buy it without reservations. 

[krzychuzokecia 717]

On 4/17/2021 at 1:07 AM, ebud said:

Is there anyone around here that can speak to the SP viability of this DLC? I mean I will get it, but from what I read the only SP portion is a few familiarization missions?  The campaign is co-op but can you play much of anything in SP?

If BI own "Apex Protocol" can be any indicator, then campaign is doable in SP but only if you're not afraid about over-using the arcade respawn mechanic (in "Apex Protocol" playing alone meant no AI team-mates however, maybe it's different with PF?).

 

On 4/25/2021 at 6:27 AM, Beagle said:

I play ArmA games for multiplayer only since ArmA II, and the CDLC servers for GM where dead from the start.I bought GM in expectation for at least some strategical cold war Multiplayer action (warfare, at least warlords like)... there was none, and the SIngle palyer was rather bland.

If it's any consolation to you, it seems that PF devs are focused on multiplayer themselves, and from what I understand, at least some of them are active in MP groups. So I guess even if no one else would buy this DLC, you'd be at least able to play with people who made it.

 

Now, few things that caught my eye, when looking at a beautifully crafted website for this DLC. Seems that a number of assets is reused from earlier Arma titles - that's understandable, but some details are quite funny, like those A2 ammo crates with Yugoslav markings. I mean, it's possible that Igman ammunition found it's way to Indochina, but it should not be a secret that Yugoslavia and North Vietnam were not on the best terms in 1960s and 1970s.

 

The only PAVN air asset in the DLC is Mi-2. Now, I'm not one of the people who will scream "give me the MiG-21", but why Mi-2? From my limited knowledge (I happen to know few people associated with Świdnik plant that made those things), North Vietnam was not among the users of this type in 1960s and 1970s. Maybe Soviet Union gave few to the DRV, but I never seen any photographic evidence of this either. From what I know North Vietnam wasn't even using their (more common) Mi-4 and Mi-6 helicopters in combat during Vietnam War - so is Mi-2 in Praire Fire only because for gameplay balance? When even the website says that factions are assymetrical? Porting An-2 STOL airplane from Arma 2 would provide a more realistic, and interesting asset (imagine landing this thing in the jungle - North Vietnamese did it!).

 

One of the weapons for US side is M40A1 rifle with Unertl 10x scope. However in 1968 this weapon is very anachronistic - A1 version was introduced in 1977, and the Unertl scope was not available until 1981. Even as late as mid-1980s USMC Scout Snipers would utilize "transitional" M40A1 rifles with older Redfield 3-9x scopes, as used on (proper for Vietnam War) M40 rifle.

 

There are few other minor errors that are not worth mentioning, but while I could accept any mistake from a free mod, I have higher expectations from a commercially sold product. Especially since devs themselves boast about their military advisors - who, by the way, are amazing people, I highly recommend everybody to listen to the interviews on PF YouTube channel.