DLC- What do YOU want?

[STALKERGB 6]

ACU is being replaced. the army has recognised it's failure somewhat and a regiment that was due to be shipped out to Afghanistan was given multi-cam uniforms.

I thought that the multicam has been issued as an operational requirement for Afghanistan rather than a long term replacement though, meaning for the time being UCP is still going to be the standard pattern in use?

Edited October 4, 2010 by STALKERGB

[Binkowski 26]

I thought that the multicam has been issued as an operational requirement for Afghanistan rather than a long term replacement though, meaning for the time being UCP is still going to be the standard pattern in use?

you are correct.

[5133p39 16]

What about trains?

Don't you people want to have island with functional railroad?

(and yes, i know about that old forgotten-because-problematic train-MOD, but it would be very nice to have native support in the engine

- something like Class Train:LandVehicle {simulation="train";} ;-) )

So, for the next DLC, i want a big island (approx. twice the size of Chernarus) with at least few working railroads and native engine support for trains :)

[Phoenix. 0]

I have a craving for...

H&K Mk.23 SOCOM

FN FiveSeven

Walther WA2000

Would be great to see them with inplay options to add a suppressor or laser.

I have to say though I've been really chuffed with what BIS has already put into ArmA 2, OA and BAF. Most of the wish list has been fulfilled. :D

[gossamersolid 155]

What about trains?

Don't you people want to have island with functional railroad?

(and yes, i know about that old forgotten-because-problematic train-MOD, but it would be very nice to have native support in the engine

- something like Class Train:LandVehicle {simulation="train";} ;-) )

So, for the next DLC, i want a big island (approx. twice the size of Chernarus) with at least few working railroads and native engine support for trains :)

Trains are not important and would just be a waste of time in which actual content could be made that would bring something to the game.

[5133p39 16]

Trains are not important and would just be a waste of time in which actual content could be made that would bring something to the game.

Yes, not important, like all the other stuff mentioned in this thread :)

A new bigger island with railroads and trains could be quite useful - for example you could make a mission where the objective is to sabotage a train or railroad.

In my opinion, trains are much better idea than for example new kinds of units, the trains would be actually something NEW.

But don't worry, i am sure there will be more people who wish some crappy units rather than something new which isn't in the game already.

Anyway, it's pointless to argue about these things.

[xxbbcc 6]

Working trains on a new island would be a nice addition. Also, having small caves in the environment would be nice.

[Panthro 10]

F-22 :D

The long bow system on the AH64D actually working so I dont have to expose just to get a lock but only to fire.

A ship for Chenerus .C.O. you could do arty from and could be sunk (randomized location piloted like the UAV's? )

Coop boot camp so that you could train up you mates. alot of people are put off by the learning curve and the ability to have a REAL person training you or you and a mate would liven it up.

IF you add the ability to compare scores people could use it for fun competitions on the range etc. so maybe a small custom map using current assets?

with a Range, MOUNT, airfield etc could do it on Utes actually :)

[Steakslim 1]

At this point does anyone feel that Zargabad could be made as a part of the physical Takistan map? In other words, combine the two in a future patch? I feel that it's left out of a lot of good use aside from a few popular mods as it is a stand alone map from the rest, and in the long run, isn't much more taxing now than Chernogorsk was for Chernarus.

[viper[cww] 14]

I'd like the USMC and Russians to make a return in OA, but in desert camouflage. Also the US Army in Woodland camo for use in Utes and Chernarus and the Brits in Woodland and Desert camo.

dunno if this has been answered but ACE has already granted your wish mate :) and BAF comes in MTP, DPM, and MDPM (Woodland & Desert) default is MTP but you can find Woodland and Desert in the editor

Edited October 14, 2010 by VIPER[CWW]

[panda123 10]

And what about creating french units (like hexagon mod)?

[viper[cww] 14]

F-22 :D

F22 is already in the works check out my thread here on armaholic

[Fox '09 14]

it looks like all he did was put the pbo in his oa setup..

[ricnunes 0]

What I would like that in the next DLC (already confirmed as a PMC/mercenary units dedicated DLC) that BIS together with what is already planned that this next DLC includes the "missing" British units (that IMO should have been present in BAF) which are:

- Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank

- A fixed-wing close air support aircraft such as the Harrier GR9 (just needs minor model changes and reskin from the USMC AV-8B from ArmA2) or perhaps even an F-35B.

- Support vehicles (an Ambulance, a Repair vehicle, a Rearm vehicle and a Refuel vehicle)

BAF could have been a very interesting DLC but unfornatunally the lack a key vehicles (like the support vehicles, MBT and close air support fixed-wing aircraft), makes the British faction a very limited one to play with, specially in extensive scenarios such as Warfare!

[enad 11]

A Ranger DLC would be the best thing ever. :D

Still REALLY looking forward to this PMC DLC. Gonna be awesome!!

[Laqueesha 474]

Also the US Army in Woodland camo for use in Utes and Chernarus and the Brits in Woodland and Desert camo.

The U.S. Army only uses one camo scheme (UCP). Plus, the British are already in desert and woodland in the BAF DLC.

A Ranger DLC would be the best thing ever.

Meh, it would just be the default OA units with different SSI.

[enad 11]

It would be much different than the OA Delta Force(Which are the worst units by BIS or Johannes who ever made them, all that stretching and blurred textures) it would require new vests, helmets, gear.

It wouldnt really be worth $10 to everyone even if they included many camo schemes, but for me it would. I really want some quality Rangers, NAOW.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

it would require new vests, helmets, gear.

To me that adds absolutely nothing to the game. Rangers vs Delta Force, for me - not a big deal, it's just tiny differences. They're special forces and that makes them unique compared to regular forces. Equipment is given by mission designer depending on the mission requirements.

Sounds more like a mod project than a DLC. A DLC needs to bring something more unique to the game.

BAF: British units with british voices and equipment (now that's being unique).

PMC: Western looking mercenaries on the independent side with some unique weapons not adapted by the military (now that's being unique).

Airborne/Mountain: Pretty much normal forces for the west (which we already have normal soldiers), using not special weapons enough to warrant them. Nothing unique about these.

Rangers/Green Berets: It's special forces for the west (which we already have delta force), using weapons already in the game. Nothing unique about these.

Navy Seals: They would only be unique if they were given unique abilities wrt handling water. Like special water gear, underwater swimming, detachable scuba equipment, not loosing weapons ;) etc. That would make them pretty unique, but if they were nothing but regular special forces in different clothing, they would have no purpose (compared to delta force, which I happen to like very much btw).

[AnimalMother92 10]

It would be much different than the OA Delta Force(Which are the worst units by BIS or Johannes who ever made them, all that stretching and blurred textures) it would require new vests, helmets, gear.

It wouldnt really be worth $10 to everyone even if they included many camo schemes, but for me it would. I really want some quality Rangers, NAOW.

Jonny didn't make them, but BIS should get him to do a US SF DLC. I don't care if it's not unique, I would love a US SF pack with SEALs, MARSOC, PJs, Rangers, CCTs etc. Would even fit with the rumored AC-130 module :)

[TechnoTerrorist303 10]

What I would like that in the next DLC (already confirmed as a PMC/mercenary units dedicated DLC) that BIS together with what is already planned that this next DLC includes the "missing" British units (that IMO should have been present in BAF) which are:

- Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank

- A fixed-wing close air support aircraft such as the Harrier GR9 (just needs minor model changes and reskin from the USMC AV-8B from ArmA2) or perhaps even an F-35B.

- Support vehicles (an Ambulance, a Repair vehicle, a Rearm vehicle and a Refuel vehicle)

BAF could have been a very interesting DLC but unfornatunally the lack a key vehicles (like the support vehicles, MBT and close air support fixed-wing aircraft), makes the British faction a very limited one to play with, specially in extensive scenarios such as Warfare!

It would be nice to see the British faction properly equipped but you can't say these were "missing" from BAF. After playing extensively with the British units I can tell you that adding the MBT would be severely overpowered, remember it's a DLC for OA not for Arma 2 standalone. I'd love a chally 2 and a gr9 as official content but there's nothing in Takistan that the Warrior and Apache can't deal with.

[DaveP 66]

A Fulda Gap style map for crazy cold war style shenanigans

[Daniel 0]

I'd like to see BIS continue to create a number of regional conflict DLC packs.

Each pack would contain two opposing factions, including a full array of weapons and vehicles for each. It would also contain a new piece of terrain, along with missions and a mini campaign. Similar to the BAF DLC. The terrain should stay fictional but would be roughly based off a real location. At least one faction should be real-world. The packs should tie in with the current "ArmAverse", perhaps with story arcs where appropriate.

Bundeswehr would be an interesting choice. I think BIS should look at other areas of the globe for new fictional regions. An island off the coast of Africa perhaps, or somewhere with a tundra landscape. I think a new, small, fictional conventional opposing force would be a good break from irregular opfor too. I'll try and think up some scenarios.

Or perhaps a European Battlegroup style DLC?

*

How's this for a pitch.

(concept borrowed from CarlGustaffa)

The campaign starts you as a young farmer on an African island. The neighbouring country has decided to take control of the island nation and installs its own government. A small NATO contingent is forced to abandon the island until the politicians agree a course of action. The opening missions see your village burned while you're out farming (you see helicopters fly over then notice the column of smoke on the return). You band together and exact revenge on the enemy before joining up with the resistance. Resistance style missions ensue until NATO forces return. Perhaps they could secretly fly a number of the resistance out to sea to undergo training. While restricted in their role, NATO troops do conduct OMLT on older weapon systems and aircraft, which the player receives, and goes on to push back the enemy with technicals, soviet era helicopters (perhaps only one) and NATO supplied anti-aircraft weapons.

Several Single Player missions could be included played from the NATO army's of view.

BLUFOR:

Local Militia

NATO Force with maritime capability

OPFOR:

Foreign Invaders (Third World Conventional Forces)

Terrain:

One new island, African themed.

Edited October 16, 2010 by Daniel

[ricnunes 0]

It would be nice to see the British faction properly equipped but you can't say these were "missing" from BAF. After playing extensively with the British units I can tell you that adding the MBT would be severely overpowered, remember it's a DLC for OA not for Arma 2 standalone. I'd love a chally 2 and a gr9 as official content but there's nothing in Takistan that the Warrior and Apache can't deal with.

Why would it be British units be severely Overpowered by having a MBT?? As far as I know the US Forces in ArmA2 OA has the M1A2 TUSK (and the less armored M1A1) why would having a Challenger2 for the British make the British faction more overpowered than the US Faction? Besides the Takistan Army has the T-72 (not to mention the T-55 or even the T-34) and while the Warrior is a great "piece of equipment" it's NO match for a T-72 in open terrain combat. The same goes for the fixed-wing aircraft -> The US forces have the A-10 and the Takistan Forces have the Su-25 and the L-39.

Also I don't get your point that having a new faction with "complete equipment" list should belong to a standalone game, afterall the BAF DLC adds only 1 faction and a standalone game brings much more factions (a minimum of 2 factions, but OA brings at least 3 complete factions without including the civilians).

Finally BAF means British Armed Forces and not British Parachute Forces or British Airborne Forces (or whatever) and the objective of this DLC was clearly to add the British Armed Forces as a faction in the game and this objective failed by forgetting the units that I mentioned above.

Look, I'm also a huge fan of BIS games since OFP:CWC until the ArmA series but lets face it - The lack of a MBT, fixed-wing aircraft and support vehicles for the British Forces is a major missing and even a "fail" in the BAF DLC!

Edited October 17, 2010 by ricnunes

[Panthro 10]

I still stand by the idea of a multi player boot camp with local scoring.

that learning curve for noobs is a killer that should be dealt with & I

think this would make sense as most ppl get into it via a mate.

[SigintArmA 10]

Boot camp... for what? O_o Theres ingame bootcamp and if someone wants to 'train' their friend in the ArmA2 game in some way they can take 10 min and make a quick map, or use one of the many scripted training maps and show'm the ropes. I don't think that a Multiplayer Bootcamp (Which has been made and remade by players) is something BIS really needs to take the time making for a DLC. They have bigger fish to fry then someone asking how to access a crate or switch ammo in a tanks gunner position.