Jump to content

darkChozo

Member
  • Content Count

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

114 Excellent

About darkChozo

  • Rank
    Corporal

Recent Profile Visitors

412 profile views
  1. Re: IFF, doesn't datalink already work as a sort of IFF system? Friendly units broadcast their position over the datalink network so they're identified much more readily. At least in my experience, it's really noticeable how much faster green squares show up vs. red squares on the sensor display. It'd be nice to get just a plain trailer object that we could attach whatever we want to. Though failing that, there's always the plain trailerless HEMMT:
  2. Have you tried testing against a stationary long range target? Maybe things have changed, but when I tested the AA would engage BVR targets, it just took a while (something like 2-3 minutes). That engagement time should definitely be improved, though. You can save weapon loadouts as custom compositions, it works well if you disable snapping. Would be good if some were included by default, though.
  3. Make sure you're recovering from the side (ie. point the rack parallel to the water). For some reason, you can launch from the front/back but you can't recover. Boat size isn't an issue, the rack can fit some pretty silly vehicles like IFVs.
  4. AI will definitely engage enemy air at just about 16km, I've seen it happen. It does take them a while (like, 2-ish minutes) to realize a target is there though, way longer than a person using the radar system. Makes it very easy to nail them with missiles before they fire back. Unrelatedly, there seem to be some rendering issues with the Liberty at range. If you zoom in with binos or the Splendid Camera, a lot of the ship's internal objects render straight through the hull.
  5. Looking at the config, it looks like it's set up as radar but the color is set wrong for some reason. In terms of sensors, the radar has both active and passive radar in a 120 degree 16km cone. You mean on the statics? The NATO one at least has a 16km range, I just managed to hit a Taru using the radar+SAM combo. Also, the ship is quite nice, but I'm curious if there's any way to use the little launching bays on the sides for anything. The SITREP mentioned that you can use the ship to launch boats, but that might just be referring to the ladders on the back.
  6. The color zones are relative to your current altitude. Yellow = terrain is even with you, green = terrain is 50m or greater below you, red = terrain is above your current sea level altitude. So telling the AI to "fly in the red zone" would be telling them to tunnel underground.
  7. darkChozo

    ARMA 3 Addon Request Thread

    Faster reload, better FCS, and slightly more accuracy. Also different reload sound, if you're into that. FCSMaxLeadSpeed: 30.5556 v 25 FCSZeroingDelay: 0.5 v 1 dispersion: 0.000544 v 0.00068 reloadTime: 5 v 6 magazineReloadTime: 5 v 6 reloadSound: ["A3\Sounds_F\arsenal\weapons_vehicles\cannon_125mm\Cannon_125mm_Advanced_Reload_01",2.51189,1,10] v ["A3\Sounds_F\arsenal\weapons_vehicles\cannon_125mm\Cannon_125mm_Reload_01",2.51189,1,10] reloadMagazineSound: ["A3\Sounds_F\arsenal\weapons_vehicles\cannon_125mm\Cannon_125mm_Advanced_Reload_01",2.51189,1,10] v ["A3\Sounds_F\arsenal\weapons_vehicles\cannon_125mm\Cannon_125mm_Reload_01",2.51189,1,10]
  8. Just tried out the new terrain avoidance system, it's quite nice. One piece of feedback I have is that it can be quite difficult to read the colors against a terrain background, since the panel is transparent and the background bleeds through and changes the colors. Since this system is going to be most useful at low altitude where a terrain backdrop is very likely, would it be possible to change the map to be opaque?
  9. TBH, the new "top-down" AGMs don't actually feel like they've changed much. Even when firing at targets on about the same elevation at you, the trajectory the missiles take is still rather direct. It's nothing like the ground-based top-down missiles.
  10. darkChozo

    Audio Tweaking (dev branch)

    We're getting very close to the release of the DLC and the SPG-9's firing sound is still broken. Judging by the sound, the reverb/tail end of the shot is working, but the actual report is not for some reason. This isn't a case of it just sounding bad; it sounds incomplete. I dug through the config a little, and while I'm not really into the modding side of things or very familiar with this, it looks like the SPG-9 is configured to use the exact same sounds as the MAAWS, which mostly makes sense given that they're both recoilless rifles. Everything looks roughly correct to me, except for one thing that's a little odd; a closeShot4_SoundShader that's defined for the SPG-9 but not for the MAAWS. This shader uses the odd-looking sample "A3\Sounds_F_Tank\arsenal\weapons\Launchers\MRAWS\add", which doesn't seem to be an wss file based on playSound3d. Any config hackers out there can feel free to chime in, but maybe this is why the SPG-9's firing sound is broken?
  11. I just checked, and for some reason all of the HEAT warheads have be configured to be HEAT and not TandemHEAT. The new damage modelling does simulate tandem HEAT, and a lot of the penetrators were configured as such, but for some reason they changed it in Wednesday's patch. Hopefully it's just an oversight.
  12. I scraped some numbers from today's update: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18b9zW2IjBt7DFks5SzJegIP5fZhK83RZM3Zg3OqMWgk/edit#gid=253063913 These look a lot less placeholder-y than Friday's. I'd assume that these are more representative of what we can expect from the final release. Short notes from looking through the data: The RPG-42, MAAWS, and PCML seem to be trading off between caliber and hit value, with the RPG-42 having the highest caliber and the PCML having the highest hit. Dunno how this reflects in their actual effectiveness, or what this is based on. The Vorona is now a little stronger than the Titan AT, and both are stronger than the lighter launchers. Yay! The SPG-9 seems to be pretty close to the 105mm cannon in terms of potency, though obviously it can only fire HEAT/HE.
  13. The PCML submunition has the classname "ammo_Penetrator_NLAW_EFP", compared to most of the others which are _HEAT or _TandemHEAT. It also has a warheadName (a new parameter that determines armor effectiveness against different warhead types) of AP instead of the HEAT/TandemHEAT found on the other penetrators. So yeah, I think you may be right. And yeah, I included the 40mm because it sounded particularly interesting. There's a G_40mm_HEDP ammo type that's being used by the Panther and Marid (different from the G_40mm_HE ammo used by UGLs, it has slightly better direct and slightly worse indirect damage), so I suspect that that's where this submunition is intended to be used, though it's not for now. Also interesting to note, there are submunitions defined for the 35mm AAA gun and the 20/30mm cannons used by the Jets DLC fighters. Maybe we'll be seeing frag/flak rounds in the future?
  14. Just for the sake of discussion, here's some data I pulled from the config on dev build. This is, I believe, most of the stuff that's used to calculate penetration/damage for the various HEAT projectiles. There's also a lot of submunitions defined in CfgAmmo but not used, presumably because this is all WIP, so I included a few just for fun. For reference, hit/indirect hit are the values used as a baseline for damage calculation (indirect hit is lower because it is usually going to hit more hitzones). Penetration for kinetic projectiles is based on caliber and speed. A 50cal bullet has caliber 4.2, hit 22, and init speed of about 580. A 120mm APFSDS shell has caliber 35.3, hit 500, and an init speed of about 1670. So, what I take from this is that there are a lot of copied parameters among the new submunitions, with caliber being the only thing that's really changing a lot. I suspect that this is because these are semi-placeholder values and that there will be a balance pass later to differentiate things. So again, I suspect that there's not much point arguing effectiveness at this point, though obviously that depends on BI actually changing them later. The PCML is very different from the rest, likely because it was "fully implemented" earlier as a test of the entire system. Also interesting to note that the PCML seems to have retained its direct hit damage, likely because of the whole attack/top attack thing. Or it might be incomplete, who knows.
  15. darkChozo

    Tanks - Damage improvements

    It also doesn't really make sense for the RPG to do less than the PCML. But like I said, those are almost certainly placeholder values, especially considering the half-implemented state of HEAT and the fact that they've explicitly said that damage values aren't final. So it doesn't really make sense to evaluate them too too closely.
×