An-225

Who CONFIRMED no moving inside vehicles? No one yet, as far as I know. The signs all point towards moving inside vehicles, they DID add aircraft with cargo bays! MehMan, that is a very, very ambiguous point. What exactly are our requirements, as civilians? Do we require realistic ballistics? Sound occlusion? Realistic optics? No, we do not require a military simulator in the first place. But BIS still delivered it to us. If we don't require moving inside vehicles, why did we receive any of the above? Why should we be excluded from a simple (not from a coding standpoint) feature like moving inside vehicles? You could also say, that within the simulator, we have the requirement to move vehicles around quickly. ;)

Brilliant example Mafia. BIS have placed a huge amount of effort into ArmA 2. I doubt they are just going to leave us with ramps that do not open. The C-130 looks like it is from VBS 2, and the ramp can be opened on it too. I doubt BIS are out to remove features and possibilities for modders. Hopefully the V-22's ramp can be opened as well. ArmA 2 is meant to be a step forward. The great thing about VBS 2 for the military, is its capability (maps 10,000 km sq) and the ability to link it with other military simulators. VBS 2 does not cost $1500 because you can walk inside moving vehicles, nor is moving around in an airplane some highly secret military tactic.

Where did you draw that conclusion from Victor? It was neither confirmed nor denied by BIS. With the inclusion of the V-22 and the C-130, and its inclusion in VBS for the past two years, I would think that they would add walking inside moving objects.

Regarding the C-130 and where it is capable of taking off from - Victor, the whole point of the C-130 in real life, is that it doesn't need a paved runway to take off or land on. A C-130 can land in about 700 feet, as exhibited when it landed on an aircraft carrier. You can do rough field ops with it, and if you can carry cargo in the game, you could possibly land delicate supplies, like a HMMWV. It would not be terribly easy, but with good speed and altitude management, you could land it in any open field.

The Australian government denied the option for Raptor consideration because...put a John Howard accent on this part: "The uh, F-22, uh lacks the capability for sufficient maritime strike." From the ordnance charts on the F-35, it cannot carry a single weapon suitable for anti-shipping. Why do we need a stealth fighter for anti-shipping? Who will attack us? The New Zealanders? They have a Kiwi bird on the side of their aircraft, a flightless bird. A case of baaahhd logic if you ask me. We have Orions for maritime strike, far more capable than the JSF or Raptor. The P-8 Poseidon would have been a far more capable plane then the F-35, and it would share parts with the BBJ in service for VIP transport in the RAAF.

Make a mission titled: "Welcome to Chernarus, Cpl. An-225" in which the Hercules is waiting on the LHD, for a tour around the region. ;) I'm not sure what I will do, in all seriousness. I might start the campaign first, don't want to run out of good things to do in the game, like flying the V-22, MQ-9, Su-25 or C-130.

Maxqubit, read the same page for PS3. Seriously. "Exclusively for PS3." AVIBIRD, I know that BIA created VBS. But I'm saying, that it was BIS, who provided the basis. It was BIS who first delved into this super-realistic genre. I really don't think that BIS will let the hard-to-port-to-PS3 issue stop them, especially not if they know about how successful it may turn out to be.

Spetz, thats simply a military airtug. I believe it can carry ornance on a trailer, or pull aircraft across deck. I was annoyed that in ArmA the AH-1Z had no airspeed indicator or altimeter. I want my measurements in knots and feet thanks, not kilometres and meters! I sure hope you can turn off the speed and height reference in the top left hand corner this time. I also hope that the cockpits are legible this time. As has been stated above, the F-35B is USMC. Big Rooney, it says C-130J, but its wearing the three-tone grey that KC-130s use. Therefore: fictional USMC C-130J.

It is certainly good to see other PS3 users on this forum, all eagerly awaiting ArmA II. I think...MAG is no problem whatsoever. It simply does not pose any threat. I guess, you can say that MAG, right now, is at the stage ArmA II was at two years ago. It is nothing more than a tech demo right now, so give it a year or two til release. Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising may pose a substantial threat. However, as it stands currently, the mission editor has been cut from it. If BIS were to release ArmA II on PS3, they could make a killing by usurping the market from OFP: DR. ArmA II will at least have a rudimentary mission editor. I also think, that if BI were not considering a PS3 version then - the cut of the ME from DR has certainly piqued their interests. Note: I understand the difficulty of porting video games to PS3. But it seems to me now, that the conditions are right for ArmA II to debut on the Sony console. Even with a rudimentary editor, BIS would be one step ahead of CM. On further research of MAG, it seems it is slated for Fall 2009. Considering the lack of info on it so far, this might indicate a delayed release. DR was scheduled to be released in 2008. MAG is also set 20 years in the future. It may draw a completely different market in, so I would not classify it as a threat to ArmA II.

No, the F-35B is USMC. And while the C-130J is wearing the camo that is used on the KC-130, pilots refuel from refueling pods located on the outboard section on the wing - not inboard as the model we have seen shows. The C-130J is probably a hypothetical USMC airplane. ;)

This is something that should definitely be improved on for ArmA 2. Right now, the AI can do a lot of things that a human player cannot do. First of all, armour can sense anyone sitting in a vehicle. I tested this, placing a T-72 on a hill a kilometer away from my BLUFOR soldier, who was placed on another hill, with a clear view of the T-72. The T-72 was facing away from my soldier. I had an M119 placed right next to me. After watching the T-72 for 10 seconds, it made no movements to respond to my presence on foot. I got into the M119. The turret swings around at me, and a SABOT is fired. The same test was conducted on Rahmadi, with the T-72 placed a few meters infront of my BLUFOR rifleman, facing away. I used an M2, an AGS-30, a Mk.19, a HMMWV, the Lada and a searchlight. In all instances, it killed me as soon as I got into the vehicle or object. Tanks also have unnatural FOVs. In one test, I went prone and crawled underneath the vision blocks of a T-72. As soon as I crawled underneath the front, the gunner and commander started targeting me. In another test, I made my BLUFOR rifleman get into the back of a BMP. An OPFOR BMP had a waypoint to drive past me, and when he did, he fired an ATGM at me. How would you know if I'm sitting in the back of a BMP, of all things? Groups also ruin stealth missions completely. It is impossible to kill a group member without everyone else knowing about it. Another test. A team leader was placed at South West entrance to Somato. Another rifleman in his group was placed a kilometer away. My BLUFOR specialist spawned behind the rifleman. After killing him with an M4SD (with SD ammo), I ran the kilometer to the group leader. Sure enough, the group leader was lying prone on the ground, looking in my direction. The same thing did not happen if I ungrouped the two. The test was repeated, grouped and ungrouped at a smaller distance (within visual range) with the same respective results. I don't think anyone would complain if the list above was improved?

The Kobra has no real place in modern air combat anyway, so I guess it is natural that the Alpha Limiter is left ON inside Flankers.

Perhaps a PS3 version was not mentioned in that video simply because that person inquired about the X360 only? SGT 2AD, that is an unfair assumption...yes it is a small Czech studio, but its the year 2009. It should not be too hard. BI created a game that is now used worldwide to train military forces, they can't port a game to PS3? Also, Xbox live service is not provided readily in the Czech Republic. Nor anywhere else in Eastern Europe in fact, even Russia does not receive service readily. This is a game that is played throughout a large portion of Eastern Europe (take a look at ArmA's server list, look at all the Russian servers). A large portion of PS3 owners I have met on PSN, have been Russian, so this game could fare very well on PS3.

As far as I can see, thats a USMC Herky bird. It has the three shade ghost grey that the KC-130 has..

If you're into LHD operations...as I am, you'll probably be excited to know that we already have seen footage of purple jackets, yellow jackets and red jackets. This is brilliant, and while jacketed crew members have no place on the battlefield, it shows just how far BIS are going to create immersion.

MARINE - My Ass Rides in Navy Equipment Still would be nice to get a Sea Stallion or Knight to complement our Marine aircraft on the LHD.

Mr_Tea, the point is, how does the BMP know I'm hiding in the back when no one was around to see me get in? Alex, you have raised an interesting point there (outsmart them too easily). However, if the player can think of such an elaborate sabotage scenario, the AI has already been outsmarted, yet the current spider senses stop any well thought out Spec Ops plans from going forward. Why use an artificial method of balancing player skill vs. NPC skill? The AI should try and outsmart us back, trying different tactics rather than simply being impossible to outsmart.

I would like it to come out on PS3 as well as Xbox. The fanbase is there, BIS could profit from a Sony release as well as Microsoft.

Considering that the MKI is based on a design that originated in the 70s, I'd say that its maneuverability is extremely impressive. I agree with your assessment on the Raptor, but the MKI seems to be able to outperform the Raptor under some circumstances, at high AoA. Watch it from 0:12 to 0:19. The Raptor seems to win at maneuvering at lower speeds. All in all, I'm not surprised that a 5th generation fighter can outperform a 4/4.5 generation fighter. You must give credit to the Russians for developing such a versatile basis.

I also thought about the teamwork between groups, however, the reaction time for the other members in the group is phenomenal for this sort of thing. And if the group is simply sitting there guarding something, they will not sit there spamming, "Report Status." I make small stealth missions using the ungrouped workaround, but it would be nice if we didn't have to use a workaround for something like this, and true stealth could be attained even with groups. It would be really nice if you could kill off a group of patrolling guards from the rear, so they don't notice. Having several enemies knowing EXACTLY where you are within seconds of killing their squad mate isn't exactly stealth mission friendly.

Sure, I did a rather half-assed attempt at explaining the stealth part on foot, but now that the armour is out of the way, I can give it another shot. The only time dead soldiers were detected when killed by a silenced...or, suppressed weapon, was when they were placed into groups. So, I could place two people in a group a kilometre apart, kill one, and then the other person would instantly know my position. But if I placed two ungrouped people 10 meters apart, facing the same direction, and killed the one at the rear the fore soldier would not notice. It has everything to do with the group system, rather like magic radar. I do realise that the sound of a body falling can be heard, as can the suppressed weapon, but that is not what I'm suggesting is changed. Currently, the AI automatically know when a soldier in their group is dead.

I doubt Sukhoi were shocked either. For a stealth fighter, it has pretty good maneuverability. But for the price of $65 million, I can see where TVC on the Su-35 would be better.

But why should the AI be more capable than the human players? Why? This could be considered game breaking, as the AI can sense things a human simply cannot. The fact that he looked at me was no coincidence. It would be impossible to hear me. A kilometre away, with a silenced weapon (with the correct ammo)? I repeated the same test, without the soldiers in a group, and he didn't turn around. I placed them 20 metres apart, in a group. As soon as I dropped the soldier behind the team leader, the leader turned around and shot me. I repeated this without the soldiers in a group. The leader just stood there. It is gamebreaking, especially when you take into consideration the skill of the AI. Stealth SHOULD be possible in a game focusing on realism, without every soldier in the base knowing exactly where you are.

Uh-oh...there is no 18 rating in Australia. We simply don't get those games instead.

Regarding ground targets, right now, MANPADs can attack anything, even if the engine is off and it is a HMMWV. Regarding guidance and RWR, we have no idea what the pilot does to lock on at this point in time, whether its helmet-bore or using the Doppler/N001 as you would do to search for BVR targets. However, it would be a fair move, if A2A ordnance was made a one hit kill, and whenever you are tracked by something with a radar, you get an RWR tone, whether you have an Su-34 behind you, or when a Shilka or Tunguska is following you. My point is, I never requested prior warning to a MANPAD launch. Also, the KA-50 can carry 12 Vikhr missiles - all primarily intended for AT purposes, although you can slave the missiles for AA purposes - it is a helicopter. It takes only one Vikhr to shoot down an airplane, and it has twelve of these. The Fullback and Harrier both carry only 4 IR missiles, and it takes two hits to shoot down an airplane. Airplanes whose purpose (with this loadout) is to shoot down other airplanes. This limits both planes to only take down two airplanes (on average), while the KA-50, a helicopter, can get 12.