darkChozo
-
Content Count
100 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Everything posted by darkChozo
-
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.
-
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.
-
ARMA 3 Addon Request Thread
darkChozo replied to max power's topic in ARMA 3 - ADDONS & MODS: DISCUSSION
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] -
Jets - Custom Panels (GPS, Camera feeds, ...)
darkChozo replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
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? -
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
darkChozo replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
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. -
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?
-
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
darkChozo replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
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. -
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
darkChozo replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
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. -
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
darkChozo replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
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? -
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
darkChozo replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
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. -
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.
-
Glancing at the config, it looks like the Titan AT submunition is set up to be fairly weak; hit=250 for the Titan, compared to 300 for the RPG-42 and 400 for the PCML/NLAW. I know that they were talking about weakening the Titan somewhat, but that seems low enough to be a placeholder. Probably worth waiting until all the HEATs have been updated before looking too closely at missile performance.
-
I wouldn't necessarily read too much into update sizes. Recent DLC files are encrypted, so even a small change in a file requires a redownload of the entire file. That means that a "big update" could just be minor changes to a lot of Tank/TacOps files. That being said, gib HEAT submunition simulation pls.
-
Worth noting that the real-life Rooikat has a muuuch smaller gun, 76mm vs. the 120mm on the Rhino. I wouldn't necessarily assume that the Rhino has the same performance.
-
Is the effective range vs. heavy armor really relevant? Even if you can't penetrate an enemy tank at that range, you still might want the FCS to work for attacking lighter/outdated armor or things like fortifications. Also worth noting that Arma does simulate loss of velocity and its effects on penetration, though I have no idea if that's at all accurate to real life.
-
As others have said, the devs have specifically said that they're not doing APS for technical reasons. It's an omission that I think a lot of people would like to see implemented, but if it can't be done, it can't be done. I think you're projecting a bit here. I know in my group we pretty much came to the conclusion that we wouldn't just be getting 3 MBTs with Tanks; it just doesn't make sense to spend a time developing new assets that are basically not different from existing assets in the game. It really doesn't make sense to add an Abrams to the game when there are about a million mods that already do that. Also, I feel like community reaction to the Nyx in particular has been pretty positive, so it's a little silly for you to suggest that no one wants it. Also, your analysis focuses really hard on faction balance, but that doesn't make much sense for a game like Arma. Like, you compare the Rhino to the Angara and the Nyx to the CSAT IFVs as if they're guaranteed to be in one-on-one slugfests, but there's nothing saying that's the case. BI just provides us with assets; it's up to mission designers to use those assets to make missions that make sense. Specifically regarding the Nyx, it wouldn't really make much sense for the AAF to get a second MBT. They're a tiny micronation fighting a civil war against an insurgent force, and they're already pretty absurdly well equipped given that. It actually makes a lot of sense for them to use something like the Nyx; it's small, easily transportable, fairly effective against dudes with rifles, and able to be pressed into anti armor or anti air duty if that ever becomes necessary. The Rhino is a little weirder, because the mount-a-tank-cannon-on-a-wheeled-chassis concept hasn't really been all that successful in real life. I suspect that it was added into the game mostly because the Styker MGS looks cool (yes, I know it's not a Styker, but let's be real here). But as far as gameplay goes, it's perfectly fine as a kind of lighter tank, or as an infantry-support vehicle. I wouldn't expect it to be any sort of real equivalent to a proper MBT, but that's up to mission designers to deal with.
-
Structures (Altis) > Village > Slum House Container
-
Still there for me on latest dev build. Called "Slum House Container".
-
Seems better now. Not a speed demon by any means with that gun, but now instead of being initially slower than a Slammer it's a little faster than a Kuma. I took it through the Arudy hill climb on Malden and it maintained 18-35 KPH, compared to 15-32 for a Kuma, 10-25 for a supply Zamak, and 20-38 for a transport Zamak.
-
You can uncheck "autonomous" in the UAV terminal to disable this behavior. You have to recheck it if you want it to track a target, though.
-
Re: the warning system, a good firing position will have a preestablished line of retreat to cover. A few seconds of warning would give you a chance to get behind cover, as opposed to getting behind cover after you get hit. It's definitely tougher to take cover against top attack but it can be done, like if you have a firing position that lets you get behind a building quickly.
-
You can get them to engage with a loiter waypoint, 1000m altitude and 1500m radius seems to work well. They only use the 40mm, though; they don't seem to be able to use the 105 or the gattling. I've gotten them to destroy trucks and kill infantry, though they don't seem able to spot infantry from the air without assistance.
-
Tanks - tracked vehicles driving and handling
darkChozo replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
The Rhino is actually the fastest of the DLC vehicles. It just has crap acceleration, which I wouldn't mind seeing increased a little. -
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
darkChozo replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
It's an AAF vehicle. If there's one place where the last gen, hand-me-down faction should suffer, it's in the sophistication of their missile guidance systems. Plus, the Nyx is clearly designed as a multipurpose vehicle; even the AT variant will outperform any LSV against infantry. That being said, I do think that FaF weapons are suffering a bit right now. It used to be that their only real downside was countermeasures, but now that the lock systems are also a lot more finnicky it feels like they've lost a lot of effectiveness. It'd be nice if they retuned things so missiles are a lot more resilient to smoke. -
Tanks - SP Mini-campaign and Showcase
darkChozo replied to zozo's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
If you gun for yourself, you don't really have to depend on the AI at all. It does take a bit of getting used to, though; I found it pretty difficult to keep track of everything the first time I played the showcase, but after doing the campaign and coming back it was a lot easier.
