scavenjer
-
Content Count
271 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Everything posted by scavenjer
-
Yeah, I agree. Though I have to admit that they're being viewed as too "tanky" by the king of the hill community. And I honestly think they might need some tweaking.
-
Ah, good to know! Could there also be an issue with the planes having too thick armour? We regularly see 20,30,35mm HE shells "bouncing" off the planes. Or is that due to the ricochet angles? I'll try to gather evidence and post it on the feedback site.
-
Yes, it used to, but since Jets DLC they changed the HP and thus it's possible to hit but not kill with 1 shot. NOT altered by KoTH
-
Look again, when he fires, just up and right of the cockpit you can see sparks. Those "black boxes" are blue boxes that indicate friendly jets (KoTH).
-
What are you smoking? First off, that's not me. Secondly, you can clearly see the hit. Thirdly, black boxes cheat???
-
Another example of jets taking more damage then they should:
-
AFAIK they've already been corrected, you can no longer snipe with them.
-
Yes, both of you that understand the core issues :). I don't mind arma having its own special balance and implementing complex things as airbursts etc would need to be part of a DLC. If only jets were a little bit more susceptible to cannon fire, you don't have to make cannon fire itself better. Also I fully agree with the short range missile thing, honestly all A2A missiles should have a minium range of atleast 1KM, I've seen plenty of missiles curve through the air in less space than a car can turn. I know desync is something very little can be done about but it would help if this was taken into account so that PvP combat doesn't end up being random and frustrating. The devs have already made good steps in the right direction and I think more are to come if only we, the players, provide feedback.
-
Sure, that's what I'm saying, the disparity between cannon and missile leads to very little cannon usage, and for jets with little ammo (gryphon 150) it means you quite often can't get a kill even though you have put plenty of shots on target. A10 was only tanky in the redundancy and the titanium "bathtub", shots to the engines and wings should still have major effects.
-
@oukej If this isn't the right place, should I put this on the feedback site or on the forums? I'm not sure if this is intended but there's some adverse affects of the accuracy corrections that exacerbate an "issue" that the people I've talked to in the KoTH community seem to agree on, was already a bit of an issue. Namely the "tanky" nature of jets, they seem to take more damage without being affected than should really be the case. Part of this is ofcourse due to server desync or ping making the jets stutter about and have jerky movements, but there's also some issues with jets seemingly "bouncing" or ricocheting the incoming shells or simply seeming to take a lot of hits without being too much affected. I'm not sure if I should put this here as this is a balancing issue (make a seperate thread), or if I should put this on the feedback site (AFAIK not a bug). Seeing how shells(20mm vulcan or 35mm AA) ricochet or bounce off quite often off the jets I think there could be an issue with the jets having too much armour. M61 vulcan and 35MM KDA oerlikons have mostly HEI/HEF ammo and therefore should explode on impact (most of the time). Here's a video (DCS gamepley) that demonstrates the behaviour of the M61 vulcan cannon. Skip to 2:43 and 5:07 (0.25x speed) I realise that Arma 3 isn't supposed to be a realistic jet simulator like DCS and that you have creative freedom to balance the game as you see fit. However, I (and many others) feel like the cannons (20mm vulcan and 35mm KDA) are not as effective/efficient as they should be. In light of the recent accuracy changes (I think they're good) the cannons will be less effective than before. Previously the cannons weren't that effective anyway and most people prefered to use missiles even at very close ranges (sub 1KM). Personally I feel that the jets take too much damage to take out (component damage is rare with cannons but common with missiles), could someone tell me if this is intended? If this is not the right place I'd be happy to make a separate thread about this topic as I feel it needs to be adressed. Here's some videos gathered by community members of KoTH HT and myself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1HyJ8PHJt0&t=3840s (1Hr and 4 minute mark) Korn-Today at 10:10 PM I'm not sure if this is the kind of videos you're looking for but you can look at it and then decide if it fits or not. First clip simply hitting a buzzard a couple of times and he just keeps flying as if nothing happened. Second clip showing a buzzard hitting himself with a bomb first, then eating a AA missile and a couple of hits from me later he finally died. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBhHCjEsVs4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_2sxHzQLdw https://streamable.com/zqysu https://streamable.com/2pcav
-
Oh, cool :). Thanks, I'll have a mess around! Yeah, ka-50 in DCS isn't the most accurate though I think that's largely to deal with the immense vibrations that seem to plague it. (Compared to the Huey) The reason why the Challenger 2 still has it's rifled cannon has nothing to do with accuracy of its shells though. The British put a premium on the use of HESH which needs to be fired at a certain velocity and can't be fin stabilised, giving it rotation actually helps the effectiveness of the round. When comparing all the 120MM cannons the accuracy difference is negligible, FCS is more important as other factors like temps, pressure and potential barrel warp have a bigger impact than wether a barrel is rifled or not. APFSDS doesn't care about rifling anyway in terms of accuracy, it might even be adversely affected if the sabot separation doesn't occur smoothly.
-
Ah, that's actually quite good! I must be noticing the"flyers" more then. Thanks for once again taking the time :). I'd also love to know how you guys set up that testing array! (Always did testing on vehicles etc and crude measuring)
-
On a slightly different note, I've been trying out the addWeaponTurret commands in the editor to change the loadouts of certain vehicles with the intention to propose changes to the KoTH gamemode. For example: me and my friends have always wondered why the Hellcat is armed with DARs instead of DAGRs, currently even if you equip it with DAGRs the pilot has control over them while the copilot has the FLIR camera. Logically it would make more sense for the copilot to have control over the DAGRs so he can guide them with the FLIR camera. Anyway, the question I have is wether or not you can at all change weapon characteristics in the editor without the need for mods. (Changing ROF, FCS, maxzero range, bullet velocity, etc) I know this is possible via mods but I also think this has been done to an extent in the KoTH gamemode(no mods).
-
This is a myth, you always want the highest possible accuracy out of a weapon system, if you want area suppression you can simply adjust your fire accordingly. Look up the bren gun myth on YouTube and find a video done by Forgotten Weapons or InrangeTV, very informative. Regardless I see that most cannons have used I been changed correctly, the only one I think is a bit over the top is the Kajman 30MM. It seems that it has roughly 5 mils of accuracy while that source I posted claims 2-4mils was standard. IMO combined with the (relatively) low RoF the accuracy is a bit lacklustre and feels "forced". That's just my opinion and people I've talked to seem to agree. But if this is the way devs want it, so be it. I thoroughly appreciate that they even take a look at the cannons this late in the game's development time.
-
Ah, good to know! Thanks for the quick response, I have read that the M61 Vulcan had 8 mils of accuracy which does seem consistent with what you show, 40MM did have 0.5 mils which seems accurate too, (I thought it was more from in game experience). I'll see if I can find some 30mm charts that correspond to the cannon on the kajman. EDIT: https://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.be/2016/05/bmp-2.html I know this might not be the best source but I've seen similar statements on the accuracy of the 2A42. (2A42 is probably the closest cannon I can find to the kajman as it is fitted on many other Russian attack helicopters) I understand that firing from a moving platform such as a helicopter has an accuracy penalty but with modern FCSs this shouldn't be too severe.
-
So, what's the reasoning behind the changing of the accuracy on many of the vehicles currently in-game? Kajman 30MM and some others seem unreasonably inaccurate. For the Gatling and other high ROF cannons I understand, but the 40mm on the Marshall is supposed to be quite accurate. Atleast differentiate between APFSDS and HE, at least IMHO. (I know guns have same accuracy regardless of ammo and that you'd need to change the way accuracy is calculated, maybe have base accuracy value ammo specific but give the gun a "multiplier"? Example: 120MM APFSDS 0.1mils accuracy ---- 120MM HE 0.2mils accuracy ----- Kuma 120MM cannon 1.0x accuracy multiplier ----- Slammer M2A1 "short" 120MM cannon 1.2x accuracy multiplier) Multiplier would come in handy when you have two guns that use the same ammo but one is lower caliber so should have lower accuracy.
-
Oh, okay, thank you for replying so quickly ^^
-
This is my first forum post here so if this is not in the right place feel free to move it, I, and probably others, have noticed that the gun depression values on some tanks are incorrect as compared to their real-life counterparts. This includes the MBT-52 Kuma (Leopard 2 revolution) and the Slammers (Merkava MK4). I have looked into the files and for the Kuma it appears to have -9°, this however isn't what we have in game because they changed it in patch 1.58. The cannon was clipping the back end of the vehicle (and still is) so they gave it -5° to stop it from clipping. But because elevation angles are uniform this overrides the -9°.... I suggest making two "gun depression variables", one for the "maximum" minimum elevation (-9°)and one for the "minimum" minimum elevation (0°).There should also be a transition between the two. Below I have a link to the feedback ticket, of you want Bohemia to fix this or take a look at it, please comment on that feedback ticket so it can get some traction :) https://feedback.bistudio.com/T123481 Thank you for your time!
