merlin

It's going to be a small campaign about a war photographer with a photo grading system a la Pokemon Snap. New weapon class of "camera" will be added with animations. Press vest will be used by the player. Don't ask me how i know.

Active protection systems are seen as a major oversight on behalf of BIS because the Merkava in game has the visual features of an APS with no function in game, furthermore the game is set in 2035 and yet all of these major advances in technology remain unacknowledged. One thing to bear in mind is that it is not feasible to armor many of the components of the active protection system. The radar and dispenser must be exposed in order to function, this means hammering a tank with an autocannon, heavy machine gun or grenade launcher would damage the sensitive components of the APS and leave it vulnerable to ATGMs.

Combat Mission: Black Sea is a strategy game set in 2017 and features some very interesting and fairly grounded depictions of tanks. http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=335&Itemid=579 Abrams are upgraded with ERA and israeli trophy active protection systems, likewise for Russian and Ukrainian tanks with their respective domestic APS. Of note is that the active protection systems are not of uniform quality across all factions, they differ in number of charges, field of coverage and effectiveness. LASER WARNING RECEIVERS Most tanks are outfitted with laser warning receivers - when a laser radiation from a rangefinder is detected the turret will slew towards the direction of the enemy and smoke will automatically be deployed. MULTISPECTRAL SMOKE Speaking of smoke: tanks will deploy multispectral smoke to counter thermal imaging; in the game this is depicted as darker smoke so the player can differentiate multispectral and conventional smoke. The following video is an excellent demonstration of this and shows the smoke in the thermal and visible spectrum. AIRBURST AMMUNITION The more modern tanks (M1A2, T-90, BM Oplot) depicted in CM:Black Sea feature air bursting munitions. These shells have datalinked fuses that explode in the air; this allows the tank to take out troops in ditches and trenches as well as ATGM teams in cover that might otherwise require a direct hit. The US Army is currently developing a 120mm shell to replace MPAT, canister, HEAT and obstacle reduction rounds; it will feature a programmable fuse for air bursts. These airburst munitions are not a fluke, they are the future and they are here to stay. I think if the tank DLC features engine improvements for tanks the modding community will be very grateful and the game will be better off, however the 2035 setting of the game should not be betrayed by featuring an armored environment that hasn't changed since the 1980s. Features such as active protection systems, laser warning receivers and air burst ammunition (multispectral smoke was around in the '80s) are already fielded and create compelling gameplay elements and scenarios. https://www.army.mil/article/98946/Army_developing_new_120mm_AMP_tank_round some ammo types to consider: Barrel-launched ATGM (well depicted in RHS) Canister round Obstacle reduction round (would not be useful in game) Smoke round (Challenger 2 is the only vehicle i'm aware of that uses these but they're an interesting idea) programmable airburst round

OPTICS DAMAGE STATES I would be very interested to see optics hitboxes and damage states; with corresponding effects on the ai. The "take out the eyes" approach to disabling armor is known to underequipped rebels worldwide. In the event your optics are damaged a screen artifact (cracked glass?) might be displayed over your view or the screen could cut to static, perhaps the static would represent total destruction of the sight as opposed to small arms damage. The gunner would then switch to a backup sight that lacked thermal imaging or any of the higher magnification settings of the primary sight. I think the most important thing that can be gained from this feature is inclusion in a sample model and adoption by the modding community. SOUND DESIGN There have been some major improvements to the sound design in Arma 3 but i think vehicles have been largely overlooked. Tanks need to be loud and imposing on infantry around them, check out the Abrams modeled in RHS:USAF if you want to experience really immersive vehicle sound design. Bonus points if different tanks can be identified by their sounds! A screaming gas turbine tank is basically what i'm asking for :D. ACTIVE PROTECTION SYSTEMS (APS) Optional feature on tanks, intercepts ATGMs and rockets; the APS would have limited charges and would kill or wound friendly infantry nearby when activated; can be countered by firing multiple simultaneous ATGMs or rockets at the tank (onboard radar would not be able to detect second rocket through the debris of the first one preventing interception). I'm sure you guys are well aware of active protection systems and suspect there has been a conscious design choice not to include them; i'm sure someone else in this thread can do a better job pitching them than i can.

Sorry to bump such an old thread; But is it possible to use the soundscape from the UAV operator instead of the UAV (which is often just engine noise) when in the turret camera? I think microphones in a microUAV are very rare and in my experience pointless. Local audio is important for the situational awareness of the operator and much less irritating over prolonged use. The only exception i can think of where UAV audio would be useful would be controlling the UAV from third person. I'm sure we've all watched countless UAV video feeds from the middle east in the last decade and they've all been eerily silent, with the annoying buzz of UAV noticeably absent. From what little i know about vehicle configs I cant think of a simple solution short of muting UAV audio altogether.

I'm interested in this section of objectbuilder too. The slider will play my animation as i configured it, but how i get it in game is beyond me. I've tried naming the animation in the "key" section, assigning a 1 or 0 in the "value" section; moving the slider and repeating the process. I'll save the .p3d and open objectbuilder again and both animation keyframs will be missing from the list.

From Pufu's link https://dev.arma3.com/post/sitrep-00117 I agree with all of your post Daveallen10. The visual quality of the foliage, terrain, textures, props are all amazing; the layout of the road network/trails and building placement is solid. However I don't think Tanoa comes near the standard of interaction and detail that we saw with Operation Arrowhead which is quite unfortunate. I absolutely understand the amount of effort it takes to design and create interiors for all of the buildings and how expensive it is to render a building with ~50(?) polygons versus an enterable building with an order of magnitude more polygons, furthermore the AI in Arma is a great deal more effective in the open and i have yet to see a really convincing performance by the AI in urban areas with many enterable structures. That being said try to find some combat footage or accounts of fighting where structures, particularly in small hamlets, are treated as solid polygons rather than something to be cleared or as a defensive pillbox. I don't reasonably expect the large buildings in Georgetown to have interiors, but i think there's a good case to be made that in the smaller villages all buildings ought to be enterable. To BIS's credit this is more or less the case as far as i've seen but there are some exceptions that bother me.

To be fair its not at all out of line to speculate that the NEMO might be included in APEX, BIS has a long history of reusing assets (L-39, bits of the old A-10 Model, DayZ item assets, A2 camonets, sandbags, etc.) and the inclusion of a self propelled mortar doesn't fit the setting any less than a VTOL or light scout vehicle. Unless otherwise stated by someone at BIS, I think its reasonable to assume that assets like the XM-25, NEMO and Female models were created with the intent of being released with A3 but never made it into the game due to feature creep / bugfixing / too much development time needed to complete feature (in the case of female player models). I think what a customer looks for in an expansion is how much content / features is included in an expansion. I don't think i was alone in being really impressed and satisfied with the scope of Operation Arrowhead; I'm sure BIS is aware of this and given their reputation for reusing assets it makes sense to capitalize on existing (functional?) unreleased content. Frankly the NEMO mortar is cool but it means nothing to me and likely anyone on the receiving end wouldn't be able to differentiate it from a static mortar; for BIS the asset is already paid for and is sitting on a hard drive somewhere waiting to be put to work, I consider that fair game for speculation :D

I suspect this has been posted before but if i were in BI's position i would try to fit the NEMO mortar system into the expansion since the artwork is already complete perhaps with comparable mobile light artillery/mortar vehicles for the other factions. http://www.abload.de/img/arma3_screeenshot_egchx2t7.jpg I'd dearly hope to see the shotgun asset from E3 (2012?) return too as i'm sure BI still have it. I would expect similar analogues for each faction. I don't think BI introduced the telescoping sensor mount on the Fennek earlier this year just for one vehicle (and the remote designator); It seems plausible to me that the system was developed for an APEX asset and the functionality was ported to the Fennek for consistency. I think the timeline of the telescoping sensor release patch fits this narrative The system was first announced on February 25th 2015 ( https://dev.arma3.com/post/sitrep-00095 ) On the development roadmap that translates into just about the middle of APEX development ( https://arma3.com/assets/img/post/images/a3_apex_roadmap.png ) I tried to look up MRAPs with existing telescoping sensor mounts but it seems lockheed has developed a very modular system that fits onto just about any vehicle including a commercial SUV so im afraid i'll have to take off my detective hat here :D The XM-25 was also spotted in E3 screenshots http://www.armaholic.com/datas/users/gamestar_arma3_4_4.jpg and i was very sad to see it not in the main release. Air-burst munitions will/do play a major role in modern combat, the XM307 which is modeled in A3 was designed around the very premise ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM307_Advanced_Crew_Served_Weapon ) despite the lack of functionality in game. The US Army has recognized the advantage of air-burst munitions for a long time and has invested quite a lot of money in its development; The AMP round which will replace MPAT in the Abrams will have air burst capabilities ( http://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2015/42/1444672794-amp-round.png ). On a positive note i feel like the inclusion of the XM-25 and XM-307 in A3 illustrate that someone at BIS recognized the importance of this technology and the actual functionality never made it into the game because no time/ no resources/ higher priority work. I'm very hopeful that BIS will rectify this problem in APEX. My speculation: NEMO Mortar Shutgun class more vehicles (or even static surveillance posts like the LRAS) with telescoping sensor mounts female models XM-25 / other air burst counter defilade weapon systems) I think these are pretty safe bets since art assets/ some functionality exists for each of these features.

I love the turret elevation feature! Thank you BIS! Keep up the good work!

One of the things i didn't like about the ArmA 2 DLC model was the absence of hiddenselections, which, for obvious reasons were not included. I didn't like how the 'DRM' mechanism punished the owners in that respect. What i would have done to make a civilian Ka-60 or VIP Merlin. Hopefully someone who owns karts can get back to me but i would imagine with BIS's current DLC model this won't be an issue and retextures will be trivial.

Really enjoyed the campaign, it was up there with Portal in terms of player instruction and motivation which is something i don't say lightly. I think Bootcamp and Eagle wing have been some of my favorite Arma single player experiences in a long time, short, well written and visually interesting; and on that note towards the end of the campaign i really loved the lighting, the colors were crisp and varied, is there a color correction function in arma 3 or was this just exceptional weather/time of day planning?

As far as the targeting pod discussion is concerned I think there is a very real possibility to add it, particularly if you look at BI's efforts to implement ground stabilization in the UAVs. It's something i think would be very doable in an expansion or maybe even along the lines of the helicopters DLC. Targeting pods would make the CAS aircraft a great deal more capable and would open up self-designation for laser guided bombs and other ordnance. This was something i really appreciated in Mandoble's missile addon and i thought it added a lot of depth to an often overlooked aspect of gameplay.

The ground stabilization tweaks are amazing, I'm super grateful for whoever got this working. There's a mention in the SPOTREP about a keybind to toggle it but i can't seem to find it. Could this system be rolled out to attack helicopter optics (the lynx as well)? Thanks again to whoever worked this out, it means a lot when these features get fleshed out and stand by themselves.

very good suggestions, I think a system for delivering precision guided munitions, either by self designating or GPS is long overdue (A CCIP system doubly so). A weapon config for anti-radiation missiles would add some very interesting mechanics as well, although i think it would be better left to modders as vanilla arma does not have a great deal of vehicles that would serve as targets. I'd like to think these type of improvements would be fertile ground for an expansion, just as OA overhauled optics and backpacks.