tsb247

I have always been under the impression that the warfare game modes needed to be bigger. Rather than havingthe player manage everything themselves as a commander, often thought it would be better to have them simply be a cog in the machine. I had some nice ideas for warfare a while back in another thread. http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=119359 It has been my opinion for quite a while that the idea behind the warfare scenarios should be to simulate and entire battlefield - not necessarily create a, "Team vs. team," scenario.

I think a Dev blog would be perfect. I would enjoy reading about the processes/challenges behind the development of the new(er) engine, PhysX implementation, equipment, and/or research done for Arma 3. Either way, I would love to know more than we know now; Even if for the sake of having more to discuss.

I was thinking about something similar to this the other day as well. With the ability customize/choose your uniform, the door is opened to be able to masquerade as an enemy soldier on the battlefield. I'm hoping that the AI will have some kind of algorithm that will allow them to distinguish uniforms and treat those wearing them accordingly (with some exceptions of course). Think of the possibilities if a feature like this were put in the game. Can you say, "Espionage???"

I have high hopes for warfare mode in Arma 3. In fact, I have another thread where I posted some neat ideas on how it could be rebuilt to both be more realistic and more intense. In fact, I would do away with the MHQ 'Base' concept completely and have more of a transparent system where the player can establish larger bases by holding key points on the map and set up smaller bases where they need to. http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=119359 I think my ideas would greatly increase game length, realism, and the intensity of the battles.

Dragon skin was tossed due to some rather severe problems. The small plates delaminate and fall apart when exposed to diesel fuel (something soldiers and Marines come into contact with regularly), and extreme temperatures do the same thing as well. If you toss it into the back of a vehicle on a hot day, you may well lose all protection. http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/files/dragon_skin_release_000121may07.pdf

A railgun would definately move fast enough to get past Trophy. A railgun is the very pinnacle of KE weapons technology at the moment. However, I am also in favor of using groups of people when ambushing a tank (as it should be). A traditional rocket system, if employed by an organized team firing from multiple directions at once could overwhelm the system as well.

That's what I am hoping for as well. Tanks are supposed to not only be devastating on the battlefield, they are also supposed to be terrifying. As of right now, they aren't so much terrifying as they are inconvenient. A single well-placed rocket usually takes them out of commission, and the crew is usually more of a threat as long as you fire your rocket before the tank sees you. If BI impliments Trophy or any other active defense system, tanks will finally be soemthing to be feared. I also like the idea of an anti-material rifle being used to disable the system. The Lynx would be perfect for that role!

You know what has two thumbs and wants a T-shirt???? ... This guy! XD

To be honest, I'm not sure. I haven't been able to find much data on the weapon. From what I could find however, the entire system seems to be more of a proof-of-concept than anything else. It exists to demonstrate a recoil dampening system. It could be argued that a Javelin would fill the same role, and it would do so more accurately, but Trophy would likely squash one if it got too close.

So if Trophy has trouble stopping klinetic energy weapons, then we can speculate that a tank sabot will likely be near 100% effective if they system is implimented. However, that leave us with another small issue... I don't know of any man-portable KE anti-tank weapon. I could however see the 76mm High-Impulse weapon system with a KE round be useful or possible a Metal Storm type of system. High-Impulse Weapon System: This system with a KE round (which would likely have to be 'dreamed up' by BI unless it already supports such a round. I don't know) could be the answer to the possible, "Invincible tank," counter to Trophy if it is added to the game.

The system is likely not fool-proof. I'm sure there will be a way around it, and from the video, it looks like Trophy may very well make an appearance. I'm sure you have seen the trailer I am referring to.

Well, he did start that thread as well, so the two topics are obviously related in his mind anyway. However, I only mentioned it to simply point it out; not to discuss it any further here. As for the real military using stats... I doubt they care about K/D ratios, 'assists,' how many people a medic has healed, how many mines an engineer has diffused, etc. What the military cares about are the overall number of casualties, the time it takes to accomplish a mission, and how organized the overall execution of a mission is (among other things). Hence, the, "After action review," feature in VBS2. If we got an after action review feature here, that would be great! However, I would be heartbroken to see such things as K/D ratios and other things find their way in here. This is not an arcade shooter, and features found in arcade shooters generally have no place here. It's not about relating it to CoD or Battlefield. It's about keeping the franchise in it's niche. This is war simulation; meant to portray a plausible future warfare scenario. I don't see how stats such as those described by the OP are useful in achieving that overall goal. Besides, if anyone really has their heart set on such things, some scripting in the editor could probably add stats fairly easily. There's no need for BI to add them when a modder could add them easily enough.

The U.S. is/was developing a similar system, but when they tested Trophy, the Army didn't seem to like it for some reason. There are many who speculate that the Army had already invested too much in their own system and didn't want to give the money to a foreign company - despite the success of Trophy. To the best of my knowledge, Trophy is the only active defensive system of this type that has been widely fielded.

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=120216 Well, there is this thread... :p

I too was wondering what Iranians were doing with Israeli equipment. It all seems a bit odd to me. I am hoping that there is a rational story that can back some of it up.