Ex3B

I've got a simple vanilla gamplay question: If there is an enemy artillery unit (sochor, Sandstorm, mk45 hammer) firing on a group of players, what is the best vanilla way to locate the firing unit? On a map like altis or Weferlingen, an artillery unit firing on you could be virtually anywhere on the map, that is a lot of area to try to identify it visually. Will it show up at 100% detection range on an IR sensor if the engine is off, just due to heat from firing? If so at least a CAS jet like the Wipeout/Neophron with an IR sensor range of 4km against ground target could detect it? Otherwise, would the Shikra and Blakc wasp be best suited to the task, trying to locate the artillery while using active radar? Is there anyway to determine at least the direction that should be searched?

I used the search function, didn't find anything, so, lets stir up this can of worms. Personally, I find it to be a very cool aircraft. I believe it to be very capable, and a great piece of engineering. Its unit cost (thanks to mass production) is not even that much higher than 4th gen aircraft (program cost on the other hand....). The F-35B in particular is an amazing piece of machinery... but I could say the same things about the space shuttle, and indeed there are many parallels: too expensive, particularly program cost vs marginal launch cost, the entire program was very political, and a great piece of engineering to accomlish something that... really shouldn't have been tried to have been accomplished.... Joint Navy-Air force fighters have been done before (not just in the US). The RAF operated the spitfire, and RN the seafire. The RAF operated the harrier, and the RN the seaharrier. The USN operated the F4 phantom, and the USAF also operated the F4. The USN operates F-18s, while other nation's air forces operate F-18s. A fighter that performs well from airfields or CATOBAR carriers is not too technically challenging, and has been done before with much success (The F-111 notwithstanding). But a STOVL fighter is a very specialized thing, and the F-35 has made a lot of sacrifices to achieve STOVL capabilities. The fusalage on all variants is wider than it needs to be, because just one version fits a lift fan. The F-35 A and B's wingspan was dictated by the elevator width on assault ships... the navy version simply needed a bigger wing that folded (should the USAF version have used the C's wing instead of the B's?). Overall dimensions and weight was limited by the need for the STOVL version to have the VL capability (granted, that does also ensure a good TWR for A2A capabilities of the F-35). That's a lot of compromise for what is by far the least common variant of the F-35. In retrospect, wouldn't it have made sense to separate the STOCL fighter to another program? There was a proposed F-22N /naval version... wouldn't it have been easier to make something like (but not actually) an updated F-22 with carrier capabilities than what we got with the F-35? The USAF is getting less than what it could have, and not such a big leap over the F-22 (once the F-22 gained ground attack capabilities). The USN is getting a but less than what it could have, bit it is a big leap over the F-18. The USMC is gettingthe best aircreaft it could, and is an absolutley massive leap over the harrier. Yet in terms of numbers built, it goes A>C>B, so the aircraft model that is most compromised is the most manufactured. Am I right/wrong/ missing some point entirely? Will foreign purchases of the B model make it more abundant than the C model? Allied navies (the royal Navy in particular) absolutely need the B model, as harriers retire with no other replacement... (only the French operate a decent naval aircraft, and could use the C model). Is that alone enough to justify it? despite foreign sales of the A model too?

So I am trying to improve a port I did of a Vodnik from Arma 2, and the main 30mm gun works fine, and has the smoke and light effect at the end of the barel, as it should be: However, the coax machinegun effects appear in the wrong place. The muzzle flash is right, the tracers show the rounds are coming out at the right place, but the smoke and the light effects are wrong: I have a similar problem with a further modified version of the Vodnik in which I have scaled down the 30mm barrel, and duplicated and rotated it to look like a gatling gun (and I have changed the animation so the barrels rotate when firing), I made a new weapon class for it based on an HMG (but now with a much higher ROF and muzzle , and lead prediction so its an effective light AA gun). What do I need to do to define where these effects appear for each weapon?

Oh yeah, aesthetics are much better, as is gameplay by not having the same turret profile as a gorgon It's just that the role is redundant Oh yeah... Although I can get by without the namer/ panther by giving the mora a NATO skin. An upgunned marid should also be configured with slingload points, so that those with the desire can use the setMass command to allow them to be slingloaded for a specific scenario

And my hopes were not in vain, awesome Also looks like we got new armored vehicle variants, but while they are good, I am slightly disappointed. The BTR-T fills the same role as the BTR-K, but it looks better and doesn't reuse the gorgon turret The new Marids fill the same role as the old ones, just a different turret look (but still an HMG). An upgunned marid would have been nice and performed a new role

Insert plug for hexacopter drones with shorter ranged weapons: lim-85, Adr-97, etc

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2747026822 Hello all, I've been slowly turning an F-35C model into a pseudo- F-35B model. This comes from Ollie's original MakeArmaNotWar entry of the FC-37 thunder (APL-SA), through @AveryTheKitty's Aegis mod. (still need to change some things, particularly the nose wheel). I'm dubbing it the A-35. Its got 2 variants: The A-35C (carrier version, minimally modified), and the AV-35B (VTOL version, uses Arma 2 assets as well). Each has 3 sub variants (Stealth/Semi-Stealth/Non-stealth) Unlike other planes, each variant has a different flight envelope, so the stealth variant flies slighty better than the semi-stealth, which is itself slightly better than the non-stealth - to reflect extra drag and loading. I also modified @deltagamer's Ah-99e mohawk (APL-SA). It is now the AH-99 (EFAMS). Instead of using 2 pylons with only the choice of 4 or 5 scalpels each (one where the original missile would go, plus 3 or 4 on the stub wing), I now have 2 variants: One which uses one pylon to add 8x Scalpel/ASRAAM on 2 stub wings, and the other pylon is used to add 2x Scalpel/ASRAAM. Similarly, the other variant has a 6/4 pylon distribution. I think this gives more flexibility in loadout. V-22 (Arma 2 port) - Comes in a vehicle transport variant (can transport a nyx or prowler), a troop transport variant, and an AWACS variant. Now optionally armed via the pylon system with miniguns and 2 missile pylons - One of the pylons is slaved to the Pilot camera, so you can control a minigun turret with the pilot camera LHD (From J0nes' improvement of the Arma2 version) I may do just a standalone A-35 and a standalone AH-99 EFAMS Pics: I think the added internals are all too covered in shadow, I need to work on that

Yes, you need to edit the config. Ethically, this A-35 is derived from an open source share-alike licence, so if I understand right, I am not allowed to stop others from editing as they want Nah, that's fine, the y axis goes from 90 up (straight up) to 90 down (straight down), as it goes from straight up to straight down across 360 degrees of the x axis, that does give full spherical coverage

I will have to check that out, it shouldn't be able to do that. 1) that is the display radius, not the radar range. The shikra also has a 16km display mode, even though it's radar is only 13km (I think it's passive anti-radar sensor works out to 16km) 2) I know it's short for reality, but that's the way the vanilla units are. I balanced it to fit in with vanilla units. I would consider making a version with all sensor and missile ranges doubled... I did that for the f-35f *Edit* well, at least doubling the range of anti-air radars+radar guided AA and ARM missiles, but then I would have to make versions of everything relevant: shikras, gryphons, buzzards, SAMS, nyx, perhaps the Tigris/cheetah (although they lack radar guided missiles, it's relevant if they are data linked to sams), etc .. Yea, I don't know how to add that...

#1) I am pretty sure that the radar range is 15km, like the F-181 #2) to my knowledge, weight of stuff on the pylons doesn't matter to Arma, it would be cool if I was wrong. That said, each variant does have a different flight model, the stealth variant has a better TWR at zero speed than the non-stealth and semi stealth (and a lower drag coefficient). It's meant so that the non stealth variant is not VTOL (just STOVL) but you still have full vectoring control Well, I could make the VTOL control more sluggish 😛 That comes from @AveryTheKitty's Aegis mod's development of Ollie's mod, I can't take much credit here (I did get the mfd displaying stores to sort of work) As those aren't vanilla features, I don't know how to add them. Regarding DAS though, it sort of does have it in the form of 360 degree IR sensor coverage (much better range than found on the f-181)

Thanks Sorry, it was set to private, I changed it to public now I'm curious as to what mod the old F-35 vtol mission is from? Firewill? Cup? My old "f35f"? Double front wheel is gone in the standalone, one of the tweaks 😛

The base mod hasn't been updated with small tweaks to the AV-35B. The base mod also includes the LHD (already available as a standalone, although I should update it with a tweak to the optional ViV piece), and the V-22 variants, which I haven't put up as a standalone yet.

Ok, standalone "A-35": https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2754316499 Incorporates some minor tweaks/improvements. Standalone AH-99: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2754318278

Yea, my most popular upload is the standalone LHD. I know that I don't like to load certain mods (cough CUP cough) because there's just too much that I am not interested in. To be fair, the AH-99E mohawk mod already did that. It uses 2 pylon slots to add the stub wings (EFAMS) via pylon rail proxies. Despite using 2 pylon slots for this, one only gets to choose between 8-10 scalpels for thise 2 pylon slots (the other 4 pylons function as normal). My change is that you can now select mixtures of scalpels and ASRAAMs, in addition to a new short range arm missile inspired by the real anti-radar sidewinder variant. You can now have 8 scalpels, 2 ASRAAMs, and 4x DAR/DAGR pods (48 rockets), for a loadout a little better than A2's AH-1z. My other issue is that the sensors to stealth ratio of the Blackfoot is inferior to the kajman. They both use only LG or infrared guided weapons, but the kajman's IR ground sensors have 50% more range. A 30% radar sug reduction and no IR reduction for the Blackfoot doesn't offset this. So I buffed the visual and IR sensors of the Blackfoot to be equal to the kajman's. At the same time, the stealth variant got some buffs to IR and radar sign. I mean... it's a mod, all mods (except cdlc if you count those) are free. That title seems less descriptive. Plus I want to make another small pack with some CSAT assets.

Just realized that the last minute untested change I made broke the animations, uploaded a fix

I would like to use the USS liberty as a CSAT ship... I can change the flag to a CSAT one, have no ship name (or MICDONALS for laughs), use CSAT helos.... I can put CSAT soldiers in empty spartans/centurions/praetorians.... but if I want fire support from the ship cannon and cruise missiles, how would I script that so that I can use my drone terminal to give me fire support?

I'm more enthusiastic about using the up armored off-roads with syndicate... That and further making a pseudo "Tanoan Defense Forces" faction based on Syndicate, with the zsu-23s for some air defense and fire support

So I have a PIP in an aircraft cockpit, with the camera aligned with the pilots targeting camera. Right now it's always in thermal imaging with white = hot. Is there any way to have it change view modes ( night vision, black = hot, normal DTV) based on the virwmodes of the pilot camera? Bonus if the camera fov can also change accordingly. Can anyone provide a sample with something like this working?

Ok, that's one piece of the puzzle, how to change the PiP effect. The second piece is to link these PiP effect changes with the player induces camera view-mode changes. If I go into the targeting camera, and switch to NV mode, I want the PiP to display in NV mode when I exit, for example.

My bad, seems that the wiki is still unreliable: https://armedassault.fandom.com/wiki/AMV-7_Marshall_(Western_Sahara). "When outfitted with ATGMs, the Marshall can stand on an even footing with other ATGM-armed IFVs - albeit without the ability to ferry troops. It can double as an amphibious tank destroyer to complement the Rhino MGS, while still keeping the added benefit being air transportable with the help of Blackfish VTOLs." "Crew Capacity All variants support a crew of three consisting of the driver, a commander, and the gunner. Only the baseline IFV and CV variants are able to transport up to eight passengers at a time." "The main difference is that it has been retrofitted with Titan missile pods on both sides of the turret. Each pod contains two Titan AT missiles for a combined total of four missiles (neither pod has access to spare missiles). This variant specifically lacks the ability to carry troops in its rear compartment." The wiki said it 3 times, so I thought I had overlooked it... I'm glad this is a mistake, and I can directly replace the Marshall/"NATO Gorgon" with the Marshall ATGM in my missions

I looked at the new values, they seem to be right to me. My only suggestion now is lowering the base XMS inertia from 0.5 like an MX to 0.4 like a mk20/trg-21/katiba. Although, I know it is inline with the SPAR-16 I think the apex's spar-16 and CAR-85 weren't so well balanced (800m/s muzzle velocity, 0.5 inertia vs 930m/s, 0.3 inertia with a 9% better ballistic coefficient) Also, I realized that the Marshall ATGM does not carry passengers... why? Its not like it's cargo space is all taken by extra ammo. With troop capacity, it can function like a less armored/durable version of the NATO skinned Gorgon with a bit more powerful autocannon. If that airmobile part matters much, and there's no troop capacity, it is more comparable to a Rhino, and I would take the Rhino over the marshall for an anti-armor role

Which leaves me curious: in hindsight, a modified Marid (ATGM/autocannon variant) would be more interesting to me. Why choose the marshall over the Marid? In your view was the Marid not suitable for a PMC? Given that it's a PMC, Even with a HQ in a western county, I could imagine them operating a Turkish built apc/ ifv if it's competitive in price, and doesn't contain sensitive technology

Well, I think some lessons can be drawn from the positive reception of the Western Sahara CDLC: -The armaverse 2035 setting is viable -BI may provide source files for modification of A3 assets -Remastered A2 assets are viable, as long as one is open about it (ZSU-23) -Many of the new assets work in earlier time periods/other settings (the up-armored pickups, but not marshall ATGMs or XMS). So, with that in mind, we could have: -up-armored and upgunned Ifrits that handle like pigs, but can function as small airmobile IFVs? -upgunned Marids? -variants if the Xian: *add a big radome on top, remove the cannon turret, put a datalink and 16km 360 degree radar, allow it to mount r-77s and arms * slim it down and remove the cargobay, put a couple wing hardpoints on it, remove gunner and add a fixed forward firing cannon and a nose radome to ito make a fighter/attack variant of the Xian? -Real EFAMS for the AH-99 (not that the DEGA AH-99 isn't pretty good). Throw in a new F-35B model (not an A2 X-35b remaster), a remastered Khe Sahn, remastered V-22 with variants, a new amphib/light carrier for CSAT, and landing craft for each side. Then *just* a new map. One would hope a series of moderately sized islands with a lot of separation would get decent frame rates. Coastal areas have the sea to cut down on objects in the vicinity. Separating each island by more distance would help as each island would normally be out of object render distance if any other island. This is a problem on Tanoa if you set object render distance moderately high. Of course *just* a new map downplays the level of work needed, but every cDLC has had a new map so far

I am curious how much support there would be for a DLC similar to what I want (not that I would be in a position to develop such a DLC) Basically, my DLC concept would focus on operations from ships or islands, assaulting other islands. I figure it should include: A new terrain, consisting of 2-3 large (>50km2) landmasses, and some smaller islands. Could be just islands, could be a coast and islands. 4096x4096, with a 7.5m grid size (same as Altis). 2-3 New static ships: A NATO assault ship (A higher poly and better textured version of the atlas lhd plus) A csat carrier and csat assault ship, or some sort of hybrid light-carrier with a well deck and single cat+ wires (if on must make do with only 1 ship 2-3 new multi role fighters An f-35b derivative for NATO, and a "j-31" catobar carrier fighter for CSAT, possibly some kind of slimmed down y-31-ish stovl fighter for CSAT. 2-3 new laning craft. 1 LCAC/LCU type ship each that can carry heavy armor and large logistics trucks, possibly some civy ferry boat. A few new amphibious/ air mobile ground vehicles, particularly for CSAT, which lacks anything that can cross water and is protected against small arms while also having an autocannon or aa/at missiles. Even a vodnik port to A3 standards would be a big improvement (include working vehicle interiors for gunners and drivers) A mv-22 or future vertical lift Helo/tilt rotor for NATO, to be somewhat equivalent to the CSAT xian(big enough to carry a nyx, no bigger)- the blackfish is a bit too big to operate from lhds without problems. A giant heli (mi-26 like?) Or STOL aircraft for CSAT to be the CSAt answer to the blackfish vehicle transport... Should allow air transport of CSAt medium armor. Then a campaign battling across the 2-3 island, possibly 2 short campaigns, one from blue's pov, and one from opfors

Doesn't explain the XMS, being a bit worse than expected I didn't mean to imply that it was "crazy" A muzzle velocity of 800 instead of mid-to-low 700s isn't "crazy", nor is 950 instead of low 900s is 800 instead of low 900's for the XMS It won't make much difference, but it's more of the OCD in me. The ballistic coefficient is generally more important, and A3 has quite a different BC for 7.62x51 and x54 vs x39 (an 800 m/s 7.62x39 round will not have nearly the range of an 800 m/s 7.62x51 round) I don't think you'll find real world 7.62x39 rounds getting 800m/s regardless of barrel length, unless it's some impractically light bullet with a poor BC. Another tiny suggestion: enable the gunshield by default for the up armored off-road+HMGs, and make the gunshield match the camo scheme. On another note, I'm loving the Marshall ATGM variant, love that it has color schemes for pacific/woodland forces. It seems unnecessary for the mod given NATO forces aren't really a focus, and with a few lines of text one can get NATO camo schemes for the Gorgon, which fit with NATO in the lore, and function as an 8 wheel amphibious IFV with an autocannon with ATGMs (ie nearly the same as the new marshall), doing a green reskin for the Gorgon is trivial (I have done it). I guess you had the marshall files for the down-gunned CV variant for Ion, and figured, why not? Why not indeed, the Gorgon doesn't fit in the blackfish, but the marshall ATGM does! No need to take a Rhino MGS along with the Marshals, the Marshals can defend themselves against enemy armor.