sebdspy

Wow, this has been one of the best groups of ideas I've seen on this topic for a while! While unfortunately BIS have already said that they probably won't be implementing APS every other idea you've thrown out could be implemented imo and would really soup up armoured vehicle gameplay! I especially love the idea of just the optics being taken out, and the gunner taking directions from the commander on where to shoot etc. Would 10/10 love to see what you've suggested implemented in game! Cheers for the wonderful suggestions

That's realism... A single Challenger 2 in the Middle East got hit by over 75 RPGs in a single day. The only damage caused to the tank was it's optical sights. Tanks are extremely tough, and you should only be able to destroy them with either: a) Lucky shots with an RPG (very lucky), that penetrate through the rare weak points in armor. b) Well placed shots with Guided Missiles (even then, another Challenger 2 was hit by 15 RPGs and a Milan anti-tank missile and was fully operational after light repairs the following day) c) Air Strike (e.g. Air to Ground Missiles b) Kinetic Projectiles from other vehicles (e.g. 25mm AP rounds - 125mm + AP Rounds), again, depending where you hit. If tanks could not survive hits from some of the more common rockets and military weaponry, then they would not be used so extensively and with so much effect. Cheers

1) I think that Tank movement and control should definitely be a priority in terms of platform improvements. There are physics issues such as spinning, randomly flipping and stopping as soon as the tank gets some air time (I have been on a charge so many times only to drive over a bump to which the tank violently skids to a halt before I can move again). 2) I think that hit points should be specialized to different modules in a tank. E.g. a hit point circle is associated with a crew member, and is located where that crew member sits. If a shell hits the crew member hit points, then that crew member is dead. Similarly, if a shell hits the hit point circle associated with ammo, the tank is blown up (ammo explosion). If the shell does not hit any important hit point circles, then the tank only suffers minor damage. Kudos to siletghoust for first suggesting this. 3) I think tanks should be equipped with Active protection Systems, like the Trophy APS on the Merkarva MBT. Currently, tanks have little to no protection against rockets and missiles which are used commonly across the Arma 3 battlefield, therefore limited their ability to operate, survive and attack. This would be a major booster to Arma 3 tank gameplay. Also, a British military official stated that kinetic projectiles from tanks are becoming more relevant again today as active protection systems are greatly limiting missiles and rockets effectiveness in armored warfare. 4) In terms of content, some tanks that could be used as inspiration include: a) T-14 Armata, a new Russian MBT (CSAT) b) T-15 Armata, a new Russian IFV (CSAT) c) Scout SV, a specialized IFV for the British military (NATO) d) Al-Khalid tank, the Iranian MBT (CSAT) e) VT-4, Chinese MBT (CSAT) f) Kurganets-25, new Russian IFV (CSAT) g) Last, but most important the PL-01, a new tank designed by BAE and a Polish company that can be invisible to IR with it's special plating. This tank can be used for it's concepts and inspiration on Arma 3 tank design (e.g. IR stealth), or can be used as a whole. Thank you very much BIS for such a wonderful game. I hope these suggestions help.

Firstly: I agree with Hvymtal... If that is an F-35 lightning II, then that is not a good example to use... The F-35 has a high powered fighter jet engine that burns 100 degrees Celsius hotter than any other top of the line fighter jet today. The Xi'an, however, is a slow transport that doesn't have the ability to use afterburner and judging from the speed and acceleration it possesses with two engines, does not use the hotter, higher performance engines that fighter aircraft use, especially not the F-35. Lastly: there is also the possibility that the hot air is not even mainly vented on the ramp when it is at idle. If yo look carefully, there is exhaust streaming from the bend in the nozzles when vectoring is engaged. This could mean that when on idle, the hot exhaust is let out this way, and not through the nozzles and down on the ramp...