Lbbde
-
Content Count
40 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Everything posted by Lbbde
-
As far as I know, some of the first screenshots of ArmA3 ever, showed Hunter and Slammer with CSAT camouflage. In my opinion, a complete Skin Packet would greatly expand the possibilities for mission creators. I would give Zapot Beeblebrox's third arm, or at least 10-15 €, for something like that. At least as long as we get skins of all factions for all vehicles and uniforms (vests, rucksacks) (eg: CSAT, AAF, CTRG Hunter, NATO Marid, NATO Viper Armor, CTRG Termal Cover Uniform for Altis, simply black, without insignia, etc.) and please also please the skins from ARGO :O A few of the skins seem to be there already and you can even choose a NATO camouflage pattern for the Strider. I also believe that simple skins can be done very well by external studios. I'm not an expert, but it's really just a matter of changing a few colors and perhaps editing a few patterns, right?
-
The vehicles are placed in the editor and configured there via the corresponding functions (Edit appearance and pylons)
-
Since everyone seems to have more idea than me, I have a question: what exactly do I have to write in the expression field in the respawn module menu, so that the vehicle respawns exactly as it was before (camouflage, components and most importantly the loadout of aircraft) ? There is only written that an array is passed with the new and the old vehicle. How exactly do I use this? Can someone please write the code for this here?
-
To be exact, you also do not need a laser target because the VLS can attack any target marked via data link, such as radar-reported targets
-
A few questions to the developers: Will the aft upper deck of the Liberty be accessible in the future? There are at least two doors there and in the immediate vicinity, one floor down, is another door from which you could theoretically very well get up and down (a ladder and a simple T-shaped gangway) and how much work would cost you, how many people would have to work on it and how many hours worked you spend for it? (a serious question, not 'how hard can that be?') On average, how much time does it take for a new object to completely create it from scratch (ie with design, animation, functionality, code etc.)? How much effort is it for you to modify existing objects (for example, to reinstall a RCWS on a vehicle, to replace one weapon with another, to create an alternative version (UP variant))? More concrete: how difficult would it be for you to create AA and GMG variants of Prowler and Quilin (with the Titan AA Launcher and Mk32 GMG)? and how big would be the effort to create a new object, if you recombine already existing components (eg: as already mentioned by me, an autocanon for the destroyer from the 20mm weapon of the Nyx and possibly the basis of one of the other weapon systems for the Liberty / Freedom) (MRAPs with the AA and AT weapon systems from the Nyx would certainly be cool as well, with me personally at the moment the AA and GMG versions for the LSVs are more important :D) Btw did you notice that the numbers on the hull of the Liberty vanish when you enter a two-digit number in one of the text boxes in the editor? :O
-
I am well aware of that. I just wanted to suggest a simple way to implement such a weapon in the game, because I thought that it would be easier for the developers to combine existing models and possibly adapt slightly, rather than designing a whole new weapon system. :D :O Besides, I think of something like a remote-controlled weapon rather than a manually operated one. Here in Germany almost all ships have installed the MLG27 and, as far as I know, the M242 is used on the Arleigh-Burke (at least on some). Of course there is no explicit space on the Liberty, but if you had the base of the Praetorian (if only) you could put it on the back upper deck on the railing and it could cover the ship all around. Since I still hope that the middle section gets a little update, so that we also can enter the upper deck (a ladder and a simple gang would already be enough), I also hope that maybe on port and on starboard room for such a Weapon is created (a simple platform on the railing on each side maybe would do the job). That would just make the Liberty PERFECT. :O To the developers: Despite all my wishes for improvement, I still think that the Encore update is a really, really good piece of work and enriches the game immensely in many aspects. Congratulations for your performance and hard work. :)
-
Ok, after a bit of testing with the VLS, I came to the following conclusions: You can attack any enlightened ground target received via Datalink. The maximum range is about 32 km. You can also attack moving targets. The missile needs about 3:05 minutes for 32 km (about 1:35 for 16 km). The rocket camera is wonderful to confirm the elimination of the target. As for the Mk45 hammer, I think the rate of fire is good as it is, assuming that guided ammunition is used. (By comparison, the firing rate of the real 127/64 Lightweigt drops from 40 Rpm to 17 Rpm when using Guided Vulcano ammunition, which increases the range from 30 km to 100 km) What is irritating me is that the range has a gap: Close ranges from 705 to 2167 m Medium from 1361 to 4181 m Far from 5445 to 16725 Km Further from 12252 to 37633 m and extreme from 21781 to 66903 m Between medium and Far is a gap of 1264 m where you can not hit anything. Now that the Mk45 can be used as artillery, the Liberty also no longer has effective surface close-range defense. It would be pretty cool to have an automatic cannon for this. You could put the cannon of the Nyx (possibly without the MG) on the base of the Praetorian, or one of the other defense systems, even if you might have to resize it a bit, but it would be perfect :O
-
I do not want to say that we have flying cars in 16 years, or perhaps within the next 100 years, that would be a bit too optimistic, but you have to remember that we live in a time when we humans know that we have more potential, as the first look at nature suggests. We know that there is more and we know that with future progress we will be able to harness all this potential. Examples of what people will probably bring most forward in the future are quantum computers and fusion reactors. Both are already in laboratories and have not yet been optimized for commercial use, but once we have quantum computers, the usable computing power will increase exponentially and with fusion reactors, one could solve energy problems permanently. The forecasts assume that we will have something like this within the next century and not in 16 years, but over the next 16 years, there COULD be a breakthrough that made this possible sooner. Besides, ArmA is a game and we can afford to dream a little bit about what should be possible in the future and play it in the game as well. :)
-
As far as the skills of the rockets are concerned, it has to be said that Arma 3 takes place in 2034, and that technological advances in the game have much more to offer than we know today. What bothers me personally is the very low firing rate of the VLS. It takes a long time to switch to a goal, which would not be so bad if you could fire at least immediately if the target is locked. As far as I know, a big advantage of the real life VLS is that it has a high rate of firing (at least faster than the Cold War systems). And it would be really cool if we could also fire anti-aircraft missiles from the VLS, like the RIM-162, or just the new SAMs, which is probably easier to implement than creating a new rocket for the game. Just forget the last sentence, I've just noticed that the RIM-162 is just adapted for VLS and the Centurion fires such missiles.
-
I have just tested it and it is also possible to target radar targets, which makes my above-mentioned problem with multiple VLS systems less of a problem than expected :O The Venator Cruise Missile has also got a new, detailed model, which looks like a real cruise missile.
-
I have mixed feelings about this change. On the one hand, it has advantages to switch to a laser target illumination (you can also precisely attack people or anything you want), but it also takes away some great features. The following example: You attack an airfield. One person flies over the target area during a reconnaissance flight and identifies targets (for example: aircraft in front of the hangar, trucks on the runway, artillery here tanks there). The VLS controller has been able to fire a full salvo of missiles at each enlightened position. Although blind and "good luck", but it was possible. Now every target has to be explicitly marked and you have to wait for the impact until you can attack the next target because the missile follows the laser. In addition, attacks with multiple VLSs are now harder to coordinate because you do not see what laser target you have marked. In a scenario where e.g. If two destroyers attack a target simultaneously, it can quickly come to complications who uses which target marker. In addition, the missile lands in the blue when the laser target illumination is interrupted. I'm really not an expert and it may well be that a whole salvo of cruise missiles is not a very profitable, unnecessary, excessive use of firepower, but in a sandbox game like ArmA I'd rather let the players decide for themselves how much you do oriented to the reality. Incidentally, I noticed that the size of the explosion at the impact does not quite correspond to the actual explosive effect. The explosion is really huge, but in a test only the target was destroyed and vehicles less than 10m away were more or less untouched.
-
Is there a reason I can not use the Artillery Computer with the VLS anymore, or is my game just broken? Btw it's really cool that the VLS now has real cruise missiles and you can choose between HE and Cluster. :O
-
I just noticed a few graphics errors The aileron of the A-164 is not syncron. On the left, the aileron is much stronger than the right. The flight behavior is not impaired, but only for the optics that should be fixed :) On the MQ-4A, the aileron responds equally on both sides (if you roll to the left both sides go up and if you roll to the right both sides go down) and the elevator is not animated at all. Whereby I'm not sure if this is a bug. With the AN / MPQ-105 radar, the "Radar Shield" and the radar tower clipt through the platform on the trailer or trailer itself when it turns. The MIM-134 SAM system clips at about 138 ° to 140 ° and at about 228 ° to 230 ° through the octagonal tube on the trailer.
-
I've noticed that boats in boat racks that were saved as custom compositions sometimes spawn in reverse when using the composition in the editor, causing them to explode at the start of the mission unless turned around again. Apart from that, one way to change the loadout in the mission would be really nice, because it would really make a lot easier, but now that the development focus is on other projects, we probably have little hope of getting such a thing and we probably have to rely on external scripts. It seems a bit like a missed opportunity for BIS. I think it's just too bad that we can only put throwers in the second slot and not, for example, a sniper rifle (which would be realistic). Mods that allow something like that work only very limited, because they have problems with the attachments. :( As for the hangar on the destroyer, I could imagine that we might get a function like the catapults on the aircraft carrier (hold space to move the helicopter to the landing deck and vice versa) and I still have the hope that one of the Doors that are locked so far will lead to the upper deck in the future. It is certainly possible to update the corresponding segments. :O
-
Could it be that the hangar gates are a little bit too narrow for a Ghost Hawk? I've been trying to fly a ghost parked in the hangar to the landing deck, but the main rotor is being destroyed at the gates. :{O I will try to make a video of it later.
