numerical entry for motars and cannons

[twisted 128]

I made a co-op mission where the team could rain down mortar fire on a target. but i found that the mortars had no elevation/angle settings. rather it is all done guessing by hand - how can accurate or sustained arti fire be delivered like this. how can a forward observer add accuracy when it is all guesswork and making do?

i suggests a numerical angle/elevation input available with mortars and cannons. it could be simple but it should be there or a great feature is going way under implemented. different charge ammunition would be great too (for different distances in some arti systems).

[Inkompetent 0]

Well, there *is* an artillery interface where you can select a location on the map to shoot at, get zoomed in on that spot, and where you get a reticle including spread for elevation differences and stuff like that. Quite thorough in my eyes.

Sure, a 'real' artillery system can be nice too, but the existing one is all but guesswork.

[arma2disapointed 10]

Think everyone want it real.

[Inkompetent 0]

Think everyone want it real.

Think just a small portion would want it real. Even though people like realism I don't think many would be arsed to learn proper artillery protocols and how to use that specific piece of artillery, plus you need a forward observer that knows EXACTLY what he is doing or all knowledge of the cannon and shooting itself will be for nothing.

[frederf 0]

Using the artillery interface you get azi/el data just fine. If the mission has humans operating artillery without the arty module present then the mission is made by a moron. As for people too stupid to work artillery, that's what M16s are for. I wouldn't want anyone without the intelligence to work a mortar to have the power of a 81mm HE shell that can be lobbed anywhere in a 3km radius. It'd be like giving a chimp a gun.

There's a way to make artillery aiming more realistic, easier to use, and easier to code than what BIS have done.

I would love to have various charges as well. It's dumb to have no flexibility in that matter. I also can't stand that artillery comes in magazines of more than 1 round.

[twisted 128]

but it is impossible using motars right now (vanilla) to hit near a target or adjust fire. I don't want uber complicated but i would like functional.

not sure that angle/elevation setting numerically entries would be that complicated.

point and click i can do through arti module right now but then the AI fires.

[frederf 0]

I don't know what you're talking about. Firing about 2.5km I have about 10m radius first round hit accuracy using the player-target-artillery interface.

[arma2disapointed 10]

Think just a small portion would want it real. .

The poll (voating) is telling you otherwise very clearly :eek:

[frederf 0]

Forum users are a small subset of the ArmA2 community, people who visit this thread (and those like it) are a subset of that. It's not exactly representative of the whole. I'm not disagreeing with the idea, just saying that forum polls are about as representative as blindfolded darts.

[arma2disapointed 10]

:eek:

And where are the other missing parts of the community and the other forums, that think different, tought this was the official.

[Inkompetent 0]

I'm inclined to think that over 95% of the ArmA community, probably 99%, isn't even looking in this suggestion forum.

And there's a vast difference between numerical entry and numerical entry. I voted 'yes', but I still don't want it *too* realistic since it'd be the learning curve of learning to play Falcon 4.0 or Silent Hunter, just for the artillery in ArmA.

[-Paladin- 10]

Think just a small portion would want it real. Even though people like realism I don't think many would be arsed to learn proper artillery protocols and how to use that specific piece of artillery, plus you need a forward observer that knows EXACTLY what he is doing or all knowledge of the cannon and shooting itself will be for nothing.

leet the PPL decide what they want, there is a normal option and a pro option in difficulty its better to get option to chose than be limited.

[Inkompetent 0]

leet the PPL decide what they want, there is a normal option and a pro option in difficulty its better to get option to chose than be limited.

Then they can have that in ADDONS. If BIS is to change the artillery system that's in the game it'll affect everyone, so it can't be done *too* advanced.

[Alex72 1]

Yep. I would like it. Most things that can be made realistic that doesnt destroy the gameplay im all for. To actually scout a place out - check the numbers and give them to an arty operator would be sweet indeed.

Alex

[EricM 0]

BIS arty module is nice and easy. You even have dispertion displayed. Though a couple of more numerical data wouldn't be bad for those trying to shoot low angle.

[arma2disapointed 10]

And you cant blame addonmakers when there addons are buggy, witch they usually are in some way.

BIS you could blame if you bought the game.

Besides that, a learning curve isn´t bad at all, you could specialize in one or a few positions, besides running and gunning.

Edited July 24, 2009 by arma2disapointed

[Wolfrug 0]

If American 81 mm work anything like Finnish (which they should), then setting up the mortars is not something you do out of the blue. In fact, I won't even bother explaining it all, since I'm sure you've all just seen direct-fire examples of it in some strange Taliban youtube video or whatever (it truly beats me how they can hit anything at all - random guesswork?). Point of the matter is, shooting a real mortar requires a bunch of sticks and targets and three people fucking around with the damned thing while a fourth is shouting instructions.

I guess, though, that simply having a hint pop up giving you the azimuth and elevation of the barrel would allow for some nice spotter-shooter interaction; but since the artillery module apparently at least allows for that, what're all y'all complaining about?

Regards,

Wolfrug

[arma2disapointed 10]

Could be done in some basic but realistic way.

here somthing that could be a polish or (finnish maybe) mortar bigone. Dont look like talibans.

240 mm:yay:

But i like this better.

And i also like the music, they are seriusley shooting fast.

Cant play with those men, they would eat you alive.

To bad it could not be in Arma2, as they have a crew of foure with a loader inside, and it look like it only can be 3 crew in Arma.

Edited July 27, 2009 by arma2disapointed

[Apocal 10]

but it is impossible using motars right now (vanilla) to hit near a target or adjust fire. I don't want uber complicated but i would like functional.

not sure that angle/elevation setting numerically entries would be that complicated.

point and click i can do through arti module right now but then the AI fires.

Open up editor. Place rifleman (player). Place empty mortar. Go to "Modules". Place "Artillery Module". Hit "Preview". Get in mortar as gunner. Select "Target Artillery" from the action menu.

Bask in the luxury of indirect fire.

[{USI}_Zombie 0]

there was an excellent arty add on for ofp, can't remember the name, where you actually had firing tables and such. I remember having to use my calculator to make adjustments and the pride when I figured it out.

I think such a system is a lot of fun but most won't want to devote the time to learning it. That is where the add on community can come in, which is I believe the true strength of the entire game engine.

[frederf 0]

WGL5 included an excellent crew server 60mm mortar that was man portable in 3 pieces and pretty much required highschool math and 2 players to be able to hit anything at any reasonable rate of fire.

CoC did all of the more advanced heavy artillery stuff.

[arma2disapointed 10]

I would say that the weakness of the game engine is that you need to add addons to the game to make it a whole or compleat game. BIS could do this from the start, and so what that the game would be big.

Now it´s just done for addons, and it´s very rareley you got to experiance a multiplayer game with everything 100% working if there is many addons inside.

[Inkompetent 0]

I would say that the weakness of the game engine is that you need to add addons to the game to make it a whole or compleat game. BIS could do this from the start, and so what that the game would be big.

Now it´s just done for addons, and it´s very rareley you got to experiance a multiplayer game with everything 100% working if there is many addons inside.

Then I suggest you donate $200 million to BIS so they can make your dream-game ;)

[arma2disapointed 10]

That´s about $0.5 mil/hour 400 hours to fix the game would be enough in a very simple calculation.

If really focus on the main problems instead of the shine on the eyeball on a innocent soldier.

[Apocal 10]

there was an excellent arty add on for ofp, can't remember the name

Wargames League (WGL), some members later went on to ACE when focused shifted to ArmA.

I think such a system is a lot of fun but most won't want to devote the time to learning it. That is where the add on community can come in, which is I believe the true strength of the entire game engine.

I thought it was pretty cool, because it added a more mental aspect to the game. Unfortunately, I have my doubts the community would accept a "nerf" to the accessibility of artillery now that they've sampled the (excellent in it's own right) ARTY Mod GUI.