SuicideKing
-
Content Count
289 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Everything posted by SuicideKing
-
Meh, couldn't care that much about APS. ERA is good enough. And you'll get these systems for free, because BI is cool like that ;)
-
Excellent to see those Revive related changes! Should fix quite a few issues we had to work around. Thanks!
-
Will the damage model and customization options be available for the old Marid class as well? (the one with the additional commander seat)
-
Ah, the display. Would suggest discussing that here:
-
Yup, you're right, i don't know how i missed it!
-
Right click?
-
One more thing, will the Varsuk get actual 125mm shells with the Tanks DLC update? The current config on stable branch is identical to the 120mm shell. nvm it's different
-
I actually don't mind this too much, to be honest. Seems to be good balance (1 RPG/PCML). Didn't try a Titan. Well, HE is usually described (both Titan and RPG-42 mention this) but which type of AT is not specified (i.e. HEAT or Tandem HEAT). Agreed that it should be mentioned.
-
Vehicle Interiors - Feedback
SuicideKing replied to bis_iceman's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
New interiors are great! As always, some comments though :P Tank gunners seem to have lost the ability to turn out? They also seem to be placed differently than their outer hatches suggest. Any changes planned here, or will this be final? The varsuk driver's 2D FOV could do with some adjustment - it's really hard to see the road in hilly terrain. Makes driving hard. The auto acceleration while going down hill doesn't help... -
Not to mention, fix the searchlight on the Hellcat
-
Tanks - Armored vehicles customization
SuicideKing replied to kllrt's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
Maaaybe even affect PCML and Titan lock? :D (PCML because it is visual camo too...although that may be complicated - a tank with green camo would still be conspicuous in a desert but less in a forest) -
First of all, tanks a lot for this update! ;-) Of course, i excitedly checked stuff out, and thus have some initial feedback. Kamysh + slat cage vs PCML from the side In DIR mode, slat armour section gets blown off, hit points take no damage. However, overall damage value is still 0.83 vs 0.88 without slat armour. The problem here is, with the next hit, the vehicle explodes since the damage value exceeds 1. The slat armour on the opposite side also gets blown off. In TOP mode, damage seems to be very less, although iirc there is hit point damage Marshall + slat cage vs PCML from the side 1-hit KO (same as without cage) in DIR mode. don't remember what happened with TOP mode. Marshall + cage vs RPG-42 Takes reduced overall damage but similar hit point damage as without cage Mora + cage vs PCML from the side DIR works intuitively (low damage, cage blown off on one side, no hit point damage) TOP works as expected when it comes to overall damage value. however hit point damage is strange - hitting it from the right damages the left track?? Tanks ERA seems to prevent damage even after being blown off (tested with HEAT, APFSDS by hitting on the same spot repeatedly) on the slammer UP and Varsuk Varsuk seems pretty invulnerable to RPG-42s. Took loads of hits, didn't do much, no hit point damage (only commander's turret got disabled). Varsuk even survived multiple RPG hits directly to the rear (no wooden log in place) without taking much damage. Kuma, without the extra armour (i.e. cages exposed) too little to no damage from Titan AT hits to the rear (manual guidance). Varsuk took a Titan AT hit in TOP mode, i was in the Varsuk. hull went red but crew didn't get hurt. Closing comments: Perhaps it may be good to drop the overall damage value entirely? Let it be a binary 0/1. When the HULL hit point takes maximum damage (hitpoint damage = 1), set the overall to 1 as well, otherwise don't calculate it. Damage modelling isn't my area of expertise (i am but a humble mission maker) so this is mostly just me musing on what i've observed.
-
Yeah i had zeus-spawned tanks refuse to move and/or skip waypoints after getting into formation. Seemed to be random, and maybe influenced by where they were placed on the map. In one case the tank went in the opposite direction to the waypoint...
-
So...this has been a problem for us for a long time. Vehicle gunners have this tendency to know about enemies that should be outside their vision cone, abruptly and suddenly turn and snipe them with one burst and then snap back to the original direction they were facing. It's really annoying when playing against them, and really jarring when inside vics with the new interiors (since this sudden motion is really noticeable). They also seem to be really good at turning and focusing on targets while in motion. As a player this is really difficult unless the target is far away. I think the main turret gunner behaves too much like the commander turret in general. Needs to be slower and more deliberate. As a player in a vehicle your awareness is quite limited (even with the new interiors), and I think the AI should better reflect that. Maybe some (slow) scanning behaviour needs to be incorporated too, so that players know the AI is going to turn towards them. (this is less of a problem with open turrets, but with CROWS...)
-
This is from october, but it reminded me - could we get a light blue variant too please? For UN Peacekeepers cosplay missions :3 (i don't know why i didn't bring this up back then...)
-
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
SuicideKing replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
Yeah that's true... hmmm... I'm not sure how to set such a test up, actually, without spending a lot of time positioning vehicles between runs :/ I guess there's also the added complication that all hitpoints may not be located in the same place between vehicles. Will try this again using getAllHitPointsDamage just to see what is happening. -
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
SuicideKing replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
Yeah my concern was more from seeing them go boom in one hit. Doesn't make for great gameplay, especially if you lose an entire squad and IFV to one random missile. I mean, it makes things far more deadly and tense, but it's not easy to balance in a large scale coop mission. The possibility to be able to deploy smoke and withdraw/evac is important to the feel and play of the mission, so it's more of a question of the best way of maintaining that, while making the PCML far more useful than it currently is in 1.80. I'm probably less concerned with how that's achieved, to be honest... It's also that, according to SAAB: which suggests that armoured targets should be able to withstand more hits from a direct mode, but I don't know the best way of translating that to light armour like IFVs, especially with flat sides. Maybe I'm missing something? Maybe they're assuming reactive armour? Of course, i would be less concerned if we had an AT4 equivalent for NATO ;-) -
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
SuicideKing replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
Yeah, the manual/SACLOS mode remains. What they removed was the ability to lock on to a laser designated target (i.e. from a laser designator). -
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
SuicideKing replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
Good to see the PCML get buffed. My initial feedback: Direct attack mode seems a bit too potent now :P It's killing most IFVs except the "Cat" APCs in 1 shot. Top attack mode seems to do far less damage sometimes the rocket disappears in top attack mode I tested this out on a bunch of vehicles. First rocket is almost always in DIR mode, second is usually in TOP mode. Going by SAAB's documentation, top attack should be more effective against armoured targets, however in the current state this is not the case, as you can see from the video. BTW what's up with the Kamysh? The damage value read was only ~0.07, yet it exploded after a few moments... additionally, in my first test, the Ifrit took two hits to kill. but when i was recording it died in one hit. I would say, make it two hits to a flat part of an IFV and 3 hits to a sloped/reactive armour part, before the thing explodes in a fireball. First hit to a flat part should be near fatal though, with a high internal casualty rate. Rear hit should probably kill/injure passengers at the back. As for top attack, I'd say one hit should have a high probability to disable the turret and injure crew/passengers (of course internal damage would depend on where exactly it blows up). I guess tanks should follow a similar pattern but scaled accordingly. Would recommend the default editor loadout for NATO/AAF Riflemen (AT) be reduced to one rocket (at most two). Speaking of AI, how likely are they to use the top attack mode? -
I have no clue which thread to stick this in at this point, but I think this is the most appropriate. Here goes. I was testing the DAGR and Scalpel with the Pawnee, Hellcat and Orca yesterday. Pawnee Can't seem to get a bore-sight lock with either missiles (i was mashing T and R while the crosshair was over the MRAP, in the video) No HUD/painted crosshair makes it useless to have those guided missiles there at all Maybe LOAL would be useful in this case? Although dangerous, since it could lock on to any heat source in the vicinity. After looking through the slingload camera, the missiles start following the camera "laser" - i.e. they go straight downwards and operate in SACLOS mode. Orca bore-sight doesn't work, but moving the cursor over the target and pressing T selects the target and initiates lock (presumably when it's within seeker FOV). this is confusing given that the HUD symbols seem to suggest the opposite, and lack of vehicle sensors. If the missile seeker FOV is indeed that wide, maybe the HUD should suggest that? Co-pilot has no HUD (intended?) Co-pilot view is locked (as if controlling a non-existent camera) and free-look is disabled The passenger door seems to have incorrect shadows cast on it from the main rotor. Hellcat Bore-sight doesn't work Cursor lock works (see comments from Orca regarding this) Co-pilot camera can lock (which is nice) SACLOS doesn't work with co-pilot camera (which is odd given what happens with the Pawnee)
-
Well, NATO and AAF helos can equip Scalpels (which are CSAT missiles) so this restriction seems very arbitrary and inconsistent. Additionally, I'm pretty sure that Skyfires are way more potent than DARs (likewise, Scalpels are way more potent than DAGRs). It's also fairly irrelevant which side the missiles belong to canonically, since as a mission maker I'd want to balance things as I see fit. These won't be default loadouts so it doesn't affect anything within BI's world-building, as far as first-party missions and campaigns are concerned. Beyond that I'm not sure why community made missions are supposed to conform to canon? Finally this would also help with balance issues that the KotH folks were complaining about, regarding the Kajman + Scalpels. p.s. the Orca's default loadout has always used DAGRs.
-
I noticed that the Kajman can't equip DAGRs and DARs through the pylon settings. Could this be allowed, please?
-
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
SuicideKing replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
I think the difference lies in needing to google it at all. For example, in vanilla A3's context, you could call the weapon: Scalpel Scalpel (SACLOS) or Scalpel (wireguided) or Scalpel (manual) Scalpel (IR) Scalpel (Laser guided) ... and so on. Since this name appears in the mouse-over text in the inventory (in case of Titan/PCML), and in the upper right corner (fire mode display), the player will know what that is without having to refer to an external source. Beyond that there's not much you can do, heck 5 years after A3 Alpha people still don't know that the PCML can lock on... i think most of the need for "retraining" was introduced with sensors anyway, so i think this distinction could only help if anything. There is of course an in-game manual too. Speaking of which, maybe this https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Category:Arma_3:_Field_Manual should be made into a PDF document or something... p.s. damn it Strike_NOR already wrote all this. I should really read the full thread first... EDIT: with the difference being, I'd say keep the current missile and add new types, to avoid breaking backwards compatibility. I have a feeling that beyond a point it's not BI's problem if the server admins/mission designers can't be bothered to balance things properly...because then even with multiple varieties of missiles, people will complain about balance etc. if these servers don't tweak things accordingly. Dynamic loadouts have existed for a year after all, they should probably be tweaking the Kajman's loadout. -
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
SuicideKing replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
Would it not... just be easier to split them into two or three sub-types? Say Scalpel, Scalpel_SACLOS, Scalpel_IR_Laser, Scalpel_IR, Scalpel_Laser, and so on? That way you keep the old behaviour (i.e. nothing breaks, no unpopular move made) while mission designers have the option of using just one of them, according to their needs. This also shifts the balancing problem in PvP from your heads to the KotH/whatever else's devs' heads. That said, I will admit to not having done any config modding myself, so I don't know how much of a hassle it will be to implement or maintain any of this! :P But yeah, if not for A3 then for whatever comes next, it would be nice to have "dynamic sensors" of some sort (that can be edited mission-side) for vehicles and missiles, or lots of variants of missiles. I guess this is a topic for another day though. *Waits patiently for Arma 4 Alpha announcement* p.s. I see dragon01 made the same point too. edit: although i would say, if at absolutely comes to this then i'd fully support removing the seeker of the titan and keeping the manual mode :P For the Scalpel, probably drop laser, for the DAGR, could remove manual mode. The Macer desperately needs a laser seeker though, given the use case of the pilot coordinating with a JTAC. not to mention an anti-radiation seeker -
Tanks - Missile flight profiles and weapon improvements
SuicideKing replied to oukej's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
Are you sure the Titan AT can lock on to a laser target? I thought it only uses an IR sensor...
