In terms of realism

[mr.g-c 6]

I don't know how much the dev's look at youtube & co. or how much videos and footage they ever saw about military actions, ballistics, impact of explosive rockets , and so on.... But as i heard Ondrej's things in the interview that he has not so much knowledge/don't like about military, i guess the other developers might also not have as much knowledge about it (there is a lack of military knowledge) - so lets help them.

To fulfill the slogan "Realistic War Simulator", a few things (based on my Arma1/OFP experience) should be really changed...

I linked videos and articles at certain keywords to proof it.

Issue Nr.1 - Portable, Light AT weapons and their overall behavior related to tanks and vehicles.

Basically:

Tanks do usually not explode when hit by any AT-Weapon!

But what can happen at older and weaker MBT like the T72 is that all the ammunition(if still there) coke-off instantly, resulting a "secondary explosion" which could let the turret fly up to 70m away. However in most cases you just would see this:

You do always see a small explosion at the impact of the warhead for a few milliseconds, but thats just the warhead when it explodes and firing its conical-shaped penetrator through the armor.

At the impact a lot of dark smoke is usually appearing for all AT-weapons + a distinctive shockwave which looks like thick, flat fog at the ground(

, though its a Javelin). I think with your new partical system these effects are doable..

What tanks rather do is "burn-out" if a AT-Weapon has managed to penetrate the armor. The burn-out most likely started because either the stored ammunition and/or fuel

(in that case no chance to survive for the crew)or the AT-projectile hit the engine-part and set it thus on fire(in that case the crew can usually escape).

Conclusion: Simulate it rawly like that and get rid of the arcade exploding tanks. The FFUR-mod for OFP has successfully simulated it exactly like that, so it is possible.

AT4 Issue:

The AT4 should be replaced by the AT4-CS, because you can fire it then from confined spaces. Normal AT4 to fire from such a position would kill or bad injury anyone inside the room. So just change the name

AT4 is more a recoilless rifle, thus the projectile doesn't have any smoke-trail nor does it makes any "rocket-like" sound. Once fired you can disposal it - NO RELOAD IS POSSIBLE. But in terms for balancing its possible to carry more than one of them (weight only 6kg).

AT4 can only penetrate up to 400mm of Armor therefor its totally useless to use it against heavy tanks like the M1 Abrams (1390mm Armor at turret and front) or the T80, T90 series. Yes in terms of realism soldiers should really need larger AT-weapons (like ATGMs) to disable such a tank.

That also could make them more threatening against infantry this time, not like in ARMA1 where you could be the arcade serial-tank killer with a RPG-7 or AT4 For a simulation this is a no-go.

However against other lighter armored vehicles like APCs or even cars its perfect.

On Impact it creates "just" a 5-7cm in diameter large hole (at tanks), but the "behind-armor" effects are devastating and so most humans would die + the interior destroyed(+interior can catch fire) which makes the vehicle useless. Impact at un-armored Car let parts like bumpers and hood fly away.

RPG-7 was well modeled and functional in ARMA1, the only thing here again is the penetration-level.

The standard PG7V Warhead can only penetrate 330mm of Armor, therefore same as for AT4: Not usable against heavy battle tanks like M1 or T90 at all - if use em against heavy tanks, then from above straight at the upper-side of the turret - thats the only chance you can have.

PG7VR Warhead can penetrate between 600-700mm of armor, therefore it could be a threat against the back or lower side of heavy battle tanks. I know a case where a PG7VR Warhead penetrated a M1A1 in Iraq - it penetrated first the side-skirts, then penetrated the "main-body" and injured a crew member.

Overall conclusion to light AT-Weapons:

- Don't use them against heavy battle tanks like M1 or T90, they would only scratch their surface unless you fire from high above in a wide angle at the upper-side of the turret.. even then its not guranteed to penetrate the armor.

- Only chance to destroy heavy battle tanks is with heavy ATGMs, heavy ASMs or kinetic energy penetrators (also known as "sabot") fired by heavy tanks.

- Use it only against light armored targets

- Use it against the tracks of a heavy battle tank to disable its moving ability (don't know how many "lucky" shots you need)

- At4 is a one-shot, disposal, recoilless rifle - therefore no reload, no smoke-trail and no "rocket-sound" at the projectile. I saw pictures in TV with soldiers carrying 2 AT4s at the same time, why not model that in Arma2 to for balancing?

Issue Nr.2 - ATGMs (Anti Tank Guided Missles):

In Arma1 ATGMs (the ones fired by infantry) were just rarely used because there was only the Javelin available + it was strangewise possible to destroy heavy battle tanks with AT4s and RPG7s. But when you care about realism this time and read the above written under "Issue 1" you have to change this. Today only heavy ATGMs or kinetic energy penetrators(fired by large cannons) are capable of penetrating the Armor of heavy battle tanks - thats a fact!

You have many ways to include (portable) ATGMs, either you use modern, light and portable ones like:

the "

" and the "MBT-LAW (

)", the Spike (Operational Video) and/or you use the heavier (and often deployable) ones like the

(great impact sounds), the Bill2, the Milan, the TOW2B (

), the Metis M(AT-13) or the 9M133 Kornet for russia (Video of launch, Video of penetration).

All of the above mentioned are know to penetrate all todays known tank-armors as the most of them

(at 0.23) and thus hitting the tanks weakest points

A few special things to mention here:

- Javelin should take a considerable long time to deploy ingame, because in real life it takes around 1 minute or more to make it ready (assembly + the included refrigerator must cool down the sensors). Also the system weights around 40kilogramms (with the 10 batteries), so its pretty UNLIKELY to carry it alone.

- MI24 Hinds default used ATGM rockets like the AT2 and the AT6 can only penetrate up to 400-500mm of Armor, therefor its can do nothing against heavy battle tanks (same like the light AT-launchers). Suggestion to solve it is to use the AT-16 from KA-50&KA-52

Overall Conclusion to ATGMs:

- Use them more often in-game because they are the only way for soldiers to combat heavy battle tanks.

- Either use the larger, deployable one (needs more than one soldier to carry and would form realistic AT-Squads) or use the light ones, which can be carried and operated by a singls soldier

- Simulate them correctly (the one that strike from above should really explode above the turret/tank) (

)

[InqWiper 0]

Pft. Your 3rd video is a LOSAT

It feels kind of silly that a thread like this should be needed but I think ArmA has proven that it is (Im thinking about the AT4 and RPG when they droped like a meter the first ten meters they travelled). Hopefully it sends some kind of signal to BIS. Either way I think the thread is interresting. It could also help mod teams spend less time searching for themselves.

[suma 8]

But as i heard Ondrej's things in the interview that he has not so much knowledge/don't like about military, i guess the other developers might also not have as much knowledge about it (there is a lack of military knowledge) - so lets help them.

I guess your guess is wrong. Different people do different jobs here. We have a military freaks (or you could call them experts here) here, and we have hours and hours ... and some more hours of various military footage. Some of us have to watch it, and some of us even like having to.

Still, a video reference thread like this can be useful, but from my experience less is often more.

If you want this to be really useful, the the best you can prepare is one short high quality video for each effect - and I pity those who have to watch those hours and hours so that they can select and extract it.

[mr.g-c 6]

But as i heard Ondrej's things in the interview that he has not so much knowledge/don't like about military, i guess the other developers might also not have as much knowledge about it (there is a lack of military knowledge) - so lets help them.

I guess your guess is wrong. Different people do different jobs here. We have a military freaks (or you could call them experts here) here, and we have hours and hours ... and some more hours of various military footage. Some of us have to watch it, and some of us even like having to.

Still, a video reference thread like this can be useful, but from my experience less is often more.

If you want this to be really useful, the the best you can prepare is one short high quality video for each effect - and I pity those who have to watch those hours and hours so that they can select and extract it.

Thanks for your reply here...ok i'll do what i can and make this a clear and ordered list, ordered by effects.

Regards, Christian

[NoRailgunner 0]

Sorry mr.g-c your intentions are nice but you are acting like a child making large wishlist for Santa.

Reading is not your certain-favourite skill?

Quote[/b] ]If you want this to be really useful, the the best you can prepare is one short high quality video for each effect - and I pity those who have to watch those hours and hours so that they can select and extract it.

[mr.g-c 6]

Sorry mr.g-c your intentions are nice but you are acting like a child making large wishlist for Santa.

Reading is not your certain-favourite skill?

Quote[/b] ]If you want this to be really useful, the the best you can prepare is one short high quality video for each effect - and I pity those who have to watch those hours and hours so that they can select and extract it.

Why personal attacks? "i will" does not means i already have done the short list

Also its not a large whishlist, just everything i found so far on videos for AT-rockets/RPGs.

I thought with YOUR help we could make a list like Ondrej LATER said.

Men, look at the post-dates (yes, you should better read) before attacking me 10mins after Ondrej has answered...

I'm not a Witch, i can't do things instantly....

EDIT: Also i have just written a email to Saab Bofors Dynamics (creator of AT4, Bill2, etc.) if they can provide us some high-quality recordings of all their AT weapons systems.

[NoRailgunner 0]

You don't get it? There is no need to have x+x+x! links into videos it's waste of time. (Ok lazy ppl who don't know about search feature at online video streaming services maybe adore you for that.)

1. Maruk said to you:

make one short high quality video for each effect

btw. "...to show certain realism" "the other developers might also not have as much knowledge about it (there is a lack of military knowledge)" is a bit rude isn't it?

listen to interview again it was mentioned what Suma told about "military advisors" in BIS.

Sorry but sometimes it's better to have an good overview before guessing and claiming of youtube & co. realism.

~goto 1. until End Of Video File.

[mr.g-c 6]

No, you don't get it! But still want to discuss with me?

He said it to me AFTER i posted the list, damn are you to dumb to read what i posted? Unbelievable...

The list was first, THEN AFTER I POSTED THIS HUGE LIST, he (actually its Suma not Maruk) said to me i should make a short list for each effect.

People like you i like most (ironic), first arguing that reading is not my strength (whats actually the opposite case), but yourself obviously can't read well and don't see that Suma posted AFTER i made the currently visible list.

Also look at the post-dates boy, you answered around 10mins later AFTER Suma gave me the instruction to make a short list - do you really think in 10mins i can create a perfect and short ordered list?

My advice to you: Better read before you answer, that would prevents us from messing up my thread.

Quote[/b] ]...is a bit rude isn't it?

No, why?

Im not a natively english speaking person, so its sounds just decent enough to me.

Quote[/b] ]...it was mentioned what Suma told about "military advisors" in BIS.

No one of us can verify this...and when i look at Arma1...

Also why i need always to justify myself when having GOOD intentions and when i really trying to help the people in any way?

Why must always come this persons like you and "decry" everything?

Unbelievable..... so please stop posting in this thread unless you have something constructive to say, PERIOD!

[InqWiper 0]

Quote[/b] ]btw. "...to show certain realism" "the other developers might also not have as much knowledge about it (there is a lack of military knowledge)" is a bit rude isn't it?

It isnt that rude. There seems to be a lack of knowledge when the AT4 and RPG drop about 1 meter the first 10 meters they travel a year after the "realistic military simulator" is released. The AT4 still sounds like a javelin when you fire it in 1.09B. The AT4 is still reloadable even though it isnt IRL. Ive heard arguments that this is for gameplay purposes but I dont buy that since one guy can now take out several tanks alone. That in my opinion does not improve gameplay. Especially when the AT rockets are too powerful and too accurate. If people that watch military videos just for a hobby can so easily find so big flaws in the experts work then a thread like this is not such a crazy idea. I am not claiming these people are not actually experts but maybe they are experts in other areas. They dont seem to be experts at AT weapons and that is one of the things this thread can help get a better idea of.

[opteryx 1562]

Hi, I have some PDF documents which I believe might be beneficial. Some of these were hard to obtain (at the time I got them).

LIGHT_ANTIARMOR_WEAPONS.rar

Documentation_about_RPG-7.rar

Dragunov_Technical_Description_and_Service_Manual.rar

ERYX_Short_Range_Anti-armour_Weapon.rar

FM1-140_Helicopter_Gunnery.rar

FM_3-23.25_Shoulder_Launched_Munitions.rar

FM_21-31_Topographical_Symbols.rar

FM_23-11_90mm_Recoilless_rifle,_M67.rar

FM_23.27_MK_19,_40-mm_Grenade_Machine_Gun,_MOD3.rar

FM_44-18-1_Stinger_Team_Operations.rar

FM_23-1_Bradley_Gunnery.rar

JAVELIN_S-15_DRILL_BOOK.rar

LAV-25_Gunnery_and_Empolyment.rar

m203Grenade.launcher_Blueprints.rar

Operators_Manual_for_Various_LAW_systems.rar

OPFOR_World_Wide_Equipment_Guide.rar

Scout_Gunnery.rar

Tank_Gunnery_(Abrams).rar <------------

Tank_Platoon_FM_17-15.rar

TOW_Long_Range_Anti-armour_Weapon.rar

TOW_WEAPON_SYSTEM.rar

Sorry this isn't video format

[mr.g-c 6]

Great Opteryx !!!

Thats what i call a post.....

[funnyguy1 0]

I suggest to follow Suma's advice and edit the first post. If he said he or someone else might look at it it's better to keep this clean and organized.

First of all I would focus only on weapons that will be, or it's highly possible that they'll be in ArmA2. Other stuff is simply just unnecessary spam imho.

Also would be cool if mr.g-c updated the first post with the useful links other users are posting.

Personally I'd like to remind BIS (cause it was discussed many times in the past) that it's important to keep the kill/mobility kill ratio of vehicles reasonable. It depends on the damage model, but not every tank should blow up immediately after a hit. Also the crew should have bigger chances of survival, and  what's most important, know what to do after abandonment of the wasted vehicle. I also vote for reconsideration of MBT and arty role in the game for more realistic and enjoyable missions. I'm sure there are plenty of references considering the armoured warfare or whatever it's called (Iraq for example). I think everyone would like to see more stalking when it comes to tank hunting than this "kill dozen of t72s with an at4, rearm and then pwn some more" thing...I won't post any movies as I don't want to break forum rules. I'm sure you know what to type on youtube.

[mr.g-c 6]

Yes i'll edit the list as soon as possible. Also i think we should rename the thread as not only videos are posted.

I think we can really help them (especially Ivan Buchta - Ivan is their military expert and probably responsible for ARMA2's outworking of real models into the game environment).

I don't know if Ivan was responsible for the "amount" of realism in ARMA1, or if it was just "so bad" because of a lack of money, time or a lack of communication between him and the artists or else.... Either way i think we can gladly assist them with this thread.

Regards, Christian

[dslyecxi 23]

I don't know if Ivan was responsible for the "amount" of realism in ARMA1, or if it was just "so bad" because of a lack of money, time or a lack of communication between him and the artists or else.... either way i think we can gladly assist them with this thread.

Regards, Christian

Here's a tip, since you obviously do not grasp the concept.

If you are trying to make helpful suggestions to BIS, the way to do it is NOT to constantly insult them, their intelligence, and their employees. I cannot even begin to fathom why they bother to respond to you given your utterly atrocious attitude towards them and their company.

Seriously, you come across as a holier-than-thou jerk in the majority of your posts. You insult them at every opportunity, demand information, demand changes, and read them the riot act over every little thing that you think you can. It's ridiculous, it's insulting, and it's not how anyone should be conducting themselves when trying to improve a product. I am simply disgusted at your attitude and I know that I am not the only one that feels this way.

You really, really need to take a long hard look at how you're presenting yourself and try very hard to strip out all the negativity. It's not accomplishing anything.

[lwlooz 0]

Even tho this is off-topic , I think your mistaken Dslyecxi , this seems to be exactly the way to get BIS's attention . Worked for I&C too.

[Henk 0]

So you're saying instead of coming forward with respect and politeness, it's better to be rude and insulting if you want to make things happen?

[mr.g-c 6]

Here's a tip, since you obviously do not grasp the concept.

If you are trying to make helpful suggestions to BIS, the way to do it is NOT to constantly insult them, their intelligence, and their employees. I cannot even begin to fathom why they bother to respond to you given your utterly atrocious attitude towards them and their company.

Seriously, you come across as a holier-than-thou jerk in the majority of your posts. You insult them at every opportunity, demand information, demand changes, and read them the riot act over every little thing that you think you can. It's ridiculous, it's insulting, and it's not how anyone should be conducting themselves when trying to improve a product. I am simply disgusted at your attitude and I know that I am not the only one that feels this way.

You really, really need to take a long hard look at how you're presenting yourself and try very hard to strip out all the negativity. It's not accomplishing anything.

What i wonder at most Dslyecxi is why you put yourself at the side of BIS and attacking me? If "they" feel attacked by me i bet they would tell me it instantly, don't you think?

Quote[/b] ]utterly atrocious

Wow that were two vocabularies i heard for the first day in my life...

To defend myself:

I don't believe that my overall "attitude" against "them" is that bad.

I mean i see this just as a bit of "cavil" (and i'm even not sure if its the "best" vocable to describe it), not really negative meant - even if it might read like.

I mean its probably a bit of the attitude we learned here to be a bit "against" the companys, because they mainly think they can do everything with us (the consumer) and take our money out of the pockets for bad "products".

The big problem with writing over the Internet is that you can't see the others face nor any mimics so you don't know how the person is really mean his text, then there is the problem with the english language (who is personally for me missing some words to describe certain things in finer nuances, as i'm knowing it from my native language), etc.

That you are "disgusted" from my attitude is a bit hard... really "disgusted" ?

Also i don't improve any product, i just want to show some videos and documents - its the developers who improve THEIR product.

Also i don't demand anything, i just say it "should" be like anything... because at the end i can also read then 10.000 posts in numerous Arma communities if they haven't done certain things like i most people think they should be .

But ok, i've done enough of the "cavil against them" and i will now concentrate to be a decent, toady forum-member.

At the end: To call this post a "tip" is in my opinion a bit ridiculous and you could have sent me this via PM - instead of taking party for a company, start a flood of Of-topic post and thus ruin my thread.

[suma 8]

Even tho this is off-topic , I think your mistaken Dslyecxi , this seems to be exactly the way to get BIS's attention . Worked for I&C too.

Yes, off course you get "attention" this way. While you can leave friendlies unattended, you always needs to watch hostiles carefully.

I would definitely prefer being approached in a polite and respectful way, rather than the way mr.g-c is currently doing it. However, still I appreciate he is actually willing to put a lot of effort into gathering and sorting the sources to help to improve the game both for us and for mod teams (just as I&C was willing to run the bug tracker). I cannot tell yet if his resources will be any good or no good - we shall see that in due time.

In the end, actually people like that are noticed not because of being rude, but rather in spite of being rude.

[dslyecxi 23]

Quote[/b] ]What i wonder at most Dslyecxi is why you put yourself at the side of BIS and attacking me? If "they" feel attacked by me i bet they would tell me it instantly, don't you think?

I'm not speaking for BIS - as you can see, they're perfectly capable of speaking for themselves. What I wrote is from my perspective, as is everything I write.

I have nothing further to add - I already said my points, and nothing you've said gives me reason to revise my comments. To reiterate: You can suggest things and make positive changes without being so negative and rude on this forum. Acting polite, mature, and civil does not turn you into a "toady", either.

[mr.g-c 6]

I have nothing further to add - I already said my points, and nothing you've said gives me reason to revise my comments.

So offtopic discussion closed i would say...

The faster, the better

Quote[/b] ]I would definitely prefer being approached in a polite and respectful way, rather than the way mr.g-c is currently doing it

At the end i don't have any problems with you as persons, its just on the business side. But as i said in the post before im willing to change or better to stop those "cavils" (or as Dslyecxi is called them "insults").

Regards, Christian

[sickboy 13]

Quote[/b] ]I would definitely prefer being approached in a polite and respectful way, rather than the way mr.g-c is currently doing it

At the end i don't have any problems with you as persons, its just on the business side. But as i said in the post before im willing to change or better to stop those "cavils" (or as Dslyecxi is called them "insults").

Regards, Christian

Im a bit with Dslyecxi here. If you want to address your Insulting/Degenerative concerns about their services and products, why don't you take e-mail / pm and let them know, instead of "sharing" this childish behaviour on a daily basis on the forum with 1000's of members?

It annoys me pretty much too, and I believe the only reason why people behave this way, is because they can; This is the Internet, and nobody can do you anything other than throwing words back at you on your computer screen. (Basicly)

IMHO It's childish and indeed rude, that people resort to these methods, when they do not have to fear any real reprecusians. (I probably wrote that wrong )

To my opinion, a responsible grown up keeps behaving, even in these situations, and knows where he should address his concerns; Not to the "innocent public" but directly to where he has problems with. (It's simply U-S-E-L-E-S-S to share these negativities this way with the public, and prolly annoying for most)

Sorry for offtopic, but to my opinion, so are half of the contents of your posts too (The unnecessary rude, and insulting comments. True right? They are just as offtopic, if not more?)

Quote[/b] ]But as i said in the post before im willing to change or better to stop those "cavils" (or as Dslyecxi is called them "insults").

It seems I didn't even read the full quote. Interesting and I bet many ppl would welcome that.

[funnyguy1 0]

Here's a couple of suggestions concerning generally the gameplay and mission ideas.

* lengthening firefights, significant increase of contact distance, and utylising air support (not everything is doable with an m16) - free acces to available support (e.g. CAS and arty), less action, more tactics. Slower gameplay. If the AI can hide, and use suppressive fire, then let them use it. Missions should be constructed in a way that will allow the independent AI to behave in a dynamic and unpredictable way (the longer AI stays in cover, the longer the firefight is, and the more fun we have).

apache in afghanistan (CAS vid) Notice how long did it take, and they didn't even see the enemy.

mission ideas with examples where possible, to inspire missionmakers:

* reckon/arty on enemy AA possitions, bombing enemy armour, bunkers, strategic buildings (spotting targets, giving coordinates, lasing etc), generally not a DIY thing.

* maybe after talking to civis, they could contact you with the resistance forces, and then (like in ofp) some blufor specops could penetrate deeper behind enemy lines with the resistance troops (obviously they know better "what and where")

* would be cool if in AT missions, you could command an AT team with a deployable AT system, deploying where and when you want

example1 from CM:SF

example2 from CM:SF

* another example - armor is much slower than racing MBTs from arma, but it seems much more deadlier

example3 from CM:SF

[bravo 6 0]

I don't have enough knoledge/documents to share with BIS atm like some people do..

... i just would like to say that im glad mr.g-c created this thread, because of the reasons already mentioned.

Im not fully agree with the email thing sickboy.

Some times "important" e-mails wich might contain "important" subjects in order to improve the game in its general, might not be read nor replyed. (dunno the reasons, and are not important now)

Please continue to share information to people in general and mostly for BIS as support if they need any.

This thread has my vote.

[sickboy 13]

I don't have enough knoledge/documents to share with BIS atm like some people do..

... i just would like to say that im glad mr.g-c created this thread, because of the reasons already mentioned.

Im not fully agree with the email thing sickboy.

Some times "important" e-mails wich might contain "important" subjects in order to improve the game in its general, might not be read nor replyed. (dunno the reasons, and are not important now)

Please continue to share information to people in general and mostly for BIS as support if they need any.

This thread has my vote.

I believe you misunderstood me. (I believe I must work on my writing skills etc )

What I was trying to say was:

[*] Share your anger, frustration, insults etc. etc. to them, by e-mail or PM

[*] Share your ideas and constructive critism aswell as discussions on the forums (or where-ever you want to share them). No matter if they are negative or positive. Without resorting to insulting and what not

Basicly:

[*] Public & BI  =   Forum

[*] BI-only     =  PM / Email

He has no quarel with the public, he has a quarel with the guys at BI (Or basicly how they brought/sold the product and support it).

Why keep posting such insulting posts, while we (the public) don't have anything to do with it? Why do _we_ have to read this bullshit on a daily basis? He wants to display his frustration to BI, right? Leave us out of it!

I say:

[*] Away with the crap (= insulting etc); Share the crap personally with them or keep it inside you.

[*] Post your ideas/suggestions etc, in a constructive manner, on the forums. Leave insulting and other unecessary attacks or whatever mr.G-C wants to call it, out of it. The rest of the world is not interested in this childish behaviour. (IMO)

So:

[*] R u angry @ BI? Take it out on _THEM_, personally. No need to share it with the rest of the world in public forums.

[*] Do you have complaints, suggestions or any other type of _constructive_ critism; Share, share, share, share, share, share as much as you like. Normal Tone, No need for insulting.

[mr.g-c 6]

Would you please stop now to discuss this of-topic stuff?

I already written my points, so no need to hear any other comments about it - ok?!