Strike_NOR

The 100 % realistic LGB simulation would probably over-complicate things for the average player. The previous method peaked out in the opposite direction It was too arcade'ish, too powerful and easy to exploit. The current solution is a good compromise between realism and arcade, but the consequence seems to be that bombs follow any laser that is closest to the center of view, and meets certain faction criteria. Unfortunately, this means that there may exist conflicts between laser spots, so that the bomb could theoretically swap laser spots while enroute to the target, which is impossible IRL.

According to @oukej, thid has to do with the target's "Zamerny" memory point being too low. This causes the missile to fly at dangerously low altitudes towards target (30cm ASL in VR map). Since VR map has no ground clutter (rocks/bushes) this generally works OK, but not in a normal terrain. A possible solution would be to force the missile to hold a minimum altitude until distance to target is below a value X meters from target.

Warpspeed = faster than light crew position change

Clarification: IIRC, the top-down attack on scalpel and macer are now more of a terrain avoidance flight profile. At great ranges from target the missile will fly in "level flight". Eventually the range to target meets a certain distance "x" and the level flight mode cancels, causing the missile to dive. Normally, due to the distance this happens at, and the average flying height of arma pilots being significantly lower than IRL, it leads to a rather shallow dive angle. This may cause confusion, as firing the missile at "typical arma ranges/height" will be closer than the distance "x", meaning the level flight mode doesn't activate.

Considering that most missile/rocket motors burn for only a few seconds, and the majority of flight is either unpowered (glide) or by a weak sustainer. I was hoping for a warning system in ArmA 3 that worked in the following manner: All projectiles/missiles with active seekers (radar) would trigger radar-warning receivers (for any unit equipped with one, that is within the seekers beam cone). All passive seekers (IR, CCD, DataLink, beamrider), saclos and dumb-fire weapons can only be identified by either radar or optical detection. This considered, one would be left with two sensors for detection: Radar Optical And a few detection methods: Radar Warning Receiver (incoming Radar threats) Radar detection of incoming threats (rockets, missiles, mortars, bombs and anything deemed "big enough" by radar cross section to be discovered). Optical detection, mainly towards IR/UV spectrum, where the backblast, or burning rocket motor would give away the threat position. By using this approach, you could diversify vehicle capabilities and balance even further, making one option more preferable over the other etc. Advanced tanks could have optical detection for incoming RPG's, rockets or missiles by detection of the backblast/rocket motor, at least giving you the chance to move or counter-attack the threat. Aircraft would have radar warning receivers or/and optical missile warning systems to alert from incoming fire. Special purpose radars could detect incoming cruise-missiles, bombs or artillery, allowing for early warning. Like Oukej said, a limitation right now makes the AI and warning systems check if there is a "locked" missile being fired. This is why when firing a passive IR missile at AI, they pop smoke immediately, as if they had a 6th sense. Ideally, there should be some random wait time from the conditions are met, to the actual CM deployment, to simulate human reaction times and such. Technically though, an advanced missile warning system could automatically deploy CM faster, but you get the gist. IRL, the missile warning system cares little if the missile is locked or not, it just detects the launch plume/UV signature. This also means, that in real life, it can be triggered by things that are not threats at all. For instance, a friendly missile being fired at an enemy, or a missile being fired between two locations next to you. It will not discriminate, and simply report what it sees. I believe some early Missile Warning Systems for aircraft were triggered by the wingman's afterburner. Meaning that if the wingman engaged afterburner, the system called out "missile launch" with directional information towards the wingmans jet. What would be nice, would be a kind of eventhandler. "Fired" gets weapon type (is this a type of weapon that triggers MWSystems?), then checks if any MWS systems are active and in range of detection, performs a line-of-sight check between sensor and weapon launch area, and then triggers the alert in all MWSystems that meet the requirements. It would not care if the "firer" is friendly or enemy. While this may add to some confusion, it actually works more like this in real life. You would have to know where your allies are, and ignore MWS detections from there, but be on alert from launches from other directions. It would also give you a general direction to start looking for the enemy threat, meaning that combating a vehicle equipped with this system, becomes much more risky. The enemy would know where you are, just after firing a shot, which means you need to have your escape plan ready!

And that's why I said it :) Sorry, didn't mean to be rude. Firing RPG's from heli's is simply a no-go. Not only from a realistic point of view, but also art/ quality (launcher clipping through the helicopter model). Furthermore, if you need that explosive air delivery, you can lob grenades or use a grenade launcher. A paid DLC for FFV "upgrade", when FFV was a free platform update, is also backwards thought.

Little known fact: Although most of the fallout happened in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, some 4-5% of the total fallout landed in very widespread areas of Norway. As a direct result of the incident, about 550 tons of reindeer, and 2300 tons of sheep had to be scrapped (yep, euthanized). Even in 2014, certain mushrooms which are susceptible to extract radioactive cesium from the earth showed very high levels of radioactivity. These mushrooms are eaten by certain animals, which in turn may be eaten by humans. So there are still issues related to the incident in 1986. Says a little about how dangerous nuclear fallout can be.

I totally agree, but only on one condition: They must implement realistic backblast simulation! ;) ;)

I'm not 100% sure about this, but aren't the UAV's piloted by "AI pilots"? I think the AI pilot uses no 3D model and can't really interact with the world, but arma 3 targets vehicles based on the pilot/driver faction, not vehicle faction. (For instance, if you are BLUFOR and jump into a OPFOR vehicle, then the BLUFOR AI will not target you, but the OPFOR will (meaning they ignore vehicle type, but recognize driver/pilot faction). Try fiddling with that instead :)

While I was tinkering with the HEAT weapons to create a new RPG-7 rocket that induced spalling upon hit, I also ran into an issue where I could see the ammo, load it into the RPG, but not fire it. Turns out in my case, it was a misplaced underscore that meant the magazine could not find the ammo to fire. In your case, it seems the magazine and ammo is set up correctly, but by your description, it seems you can't load it into the weapon. The weapon needs a defined array of magazines to be able to use them, and the mags need defined ammo types to hold. This all seems fine to me, so the only thing I can think of right now is your weapon config. All you have done is create a new weapon called "Titan_Launcher" based on the class UGL_F. Basically that creates a new launcher, that is an exact copy of the UGL_F, besides overriding magazine type to only use your custom "1Rnd_SmokeYellow_Grenade_shell_Titan". Seeing that your weapon does not know how to load it (no reload action or click and drag/drop into inventory slot I assume), then as far as I can tell either: A) You are using the wrong weapon. B) Your new weapon has the same name, description and everything ingame and is therefore conflicting with the class you inherit from. My programming knowledge is extremely limited, but try adding some more custom parameters to your Titan_Launcher, other than only "magazines[]". I did all of this stuff, but ended up having duplicate RPG-7's and Rockets that were incompatible. The easy way is to just make the default UGL's accept your new ammo. Basically: class CfgWeapons { class GrenadeLauncher{}; class UGL_F: GrenadeLauncher { magazines[]= { "Copy+paste all base class (UGL_F) magazines from weapons_F(default bis weapon config),"1Rnd_SmokeYellow_Grenade_shell_Titan" }; }; }; If I'm not mistaken, you will overwrite the vanilla game's UGL_F magazine compatibility, meaning any weapon based on UGL_F, will use your new smoke round. If you trace backwards through your inheritance (UGL_F >> GrenadeLauncher >> Default) you can limit or broaden the range of weapons that will accept your new ammo. If, however, you want a dedicated grenade launcher based on UGL_F, then you must either create that weapon from scratch, or copy/replace the info from class UGL_F. I hope this helps. I am learning these things myself at the moment - so beware that I may be giving you wrong advice or none at all. use at your own risk :)

It seems now that BI have added a new material for use inside vehicles, namely "vehicle_interior.bisurf". According to my tests this material, when struck, deals significantly more damage to the overall health of vehicle hitHull and crew. While it is still a rather "indiscriminate" way of distributing damage, it means that the vehicle exterior armor does not have to distribute the damage like before. Which in turn, should mean that ricochets and semi-penetrations now deal a lot less damage to the vehicle and crew health, unless the round actually enters the interior compartment. At this point, the vehicle takes great amounts of damage. I like the improvement, it is a way better approximation of damage, than what used to be. Although, maybe not as detailed as many had hoped :) (simulating that little sprocket that rotates the turret ring anyone? :D, or the drivers cupholder breaking?)

At this point you are better off starting the ArmA 3 diag.exe and running the command : toggle_diag "Shots"; This will turn on/off shot tracing. Any ricochet is indicated by a yellow cross. Based on your estimations, you should be able to recreate a ricochet in no-time. Let me know what the name of the ammo is and I can check the config file to confirm.

From my tests, a weapon will only spawn submunitions the first time they hit something. Secondly. I think the "parent ammunition" has explosive value over 0.7 now which means that it will disappear upon first impact. Lastly, ammo config also has a parameter for deflection angle. It is used to limit ricochets to only happen if the impact angle is below said value. So typically an APFSDS dart will have a very low angle for ricochet chance, an AP shell more, and HE shells typically 0 (meaning no chance of ricochet, only impact detonation). I do howerver believe some BI ammo (like 20mm HE) are partly explosive, meaning they can penetrate, or ricochet, and at the same time explode on each hit.

Been trying to ask about this for a while now, especially when I heard that Tanks DLC was heading our way. The thing is, it's hardcoded in the engine right now I believe, that if you give an ammunition type an explosive value of 0.7 or higher, then the shell will detonate on impact. If you give it less, then it will penetrate, may cause an explosion effect, but it will keep penetrating and exploding multiple times every time it hits. This could be seen for some HE shells that can ricochet, where the shell "explodes" on the ricochet, then explodes again on the next impact. Unfortunately, there is a second issue here, which is the timed delay fuze. AFAIK, there is no "supported" or reliable way to incorporate explosion delay to a shot (projectile) and make it start counting down from hit until either A: it does not penetrate and subsequently explodes on impact, or B: penetrates then explodes after X amount of milliseconds. By using a submunition that activates "onHit", you can despawn the original shell, then make a new HE shell spawn X amount of meters behind the original shell to "fake" penetration, and have it explode immediately. This would probably work well with walls, but there would be no penetration mechanic/calculation, meaning it would always spawn X meters behind wall. When vehicles come into play, this would also happen. Even if vehicle armor was thick enough to stop it (theoretically), this type of "workaround" would ignore that, and just spawn the same X amount of meters inside a vehicle. And speaking of vehicles, HE shells/explosive weapons have NO way of dealing splash damage directly to vehicle crew members. In ArmA 3, a fixed hit value is dealt to the vehicle, based upon how many hitpoints are influenced by the explosive radius (splash damage/indirectHit range in arma 3 terms). Then this final damage is transferred by a factor to the crew. So to make a crude example. Vehicle takes 50% damage from an explosive = crew suffers 0.5 of that which equals 25% HP loss. That's kind of how it works. Realistically speaking, an explosive shell detonating on surface would shake the vehicle/wall and explosive force would either break it, or transmit the blast waves through the wall (which is why you never lean against a bunker wall or tank interior during bombardment). In the case where the explosive is delayed, and has enough kinetic energy to break through (penetrate) a wall or tank armor, the effect becomes way more deadly because the pressure is contained inside a room or vehicle hull. At this point, the pressure would more than likely exceed the lethal values for humans, and probably exceed the structural integrity limits of buildings or vehicles and rip them apart. I understand what you seek is a simulation of the latter example, where explosions in confined spaces deal greater damage than on the exterior, and there exists a possibility of penetrating said spaces with HE weapons (missiles included). This is probably not officially going to happen for ArmA 3, I'm afraid. However, modding/scripting may be able to pull something like that off - for specific situations. Not sure if you can make HE penetration work "across the board" (meaning vs various materials, angles and thicknesses).

Make sure you find the original author, ask for permissions and give proper credit. I suggest you google ArmA 3 addon tutorials and start there to learn the basics, then start on the tank once you get past all the initial hurdles. Setting up vehicles can be quite tricky. Get ArmA tools and sample addons, there's a lot of useful stuff there too. And remember, it's all worth nothing if the guy who made the model says "no". But he's more likely to say yes if you ask first! Good luck

So I kinda' thought I'd listen to @x3kj's advice back a few pages... "Less talking - more doing". Here's a small teaser of what came out of that :) RPG-7 shot at door (two different shots): EDIT: So I tweaked some further... Tried to use tracers to simulate spark effects :) Thought it came out pretty well :)

Yeah, I don't know. Will have to perform tests - I am working on something else at the moment, maybe I'll have something to show for tonight :)

I suspect the camo nets are largely there for visual variation as I have not seen any connection/link to vehicle detectability for sensors or AI. I have asked the devs for this, but not really got an answer, but I do believe they make a difference in what you, as a human player, will see in IR mode and therefore how hard it is to detect you.

I don't know if I changed mine, but it's ALT+Z. Anyways, it's not the right place to be asking how to use shadowplay, so if this doesn't help, pelase visit Nvidias homepage or google "Shadowplay how to" and you'll be up in notime.

You need to have some kind of image recording program installed. If you have an Nvidia graphics card, chances are you have shadowplay installed. Just find out whatever keybind you have to switch it on/off, and open it ingame (should show as an overlay). Then hit record, and it will save the video in your windows user "videos" folder. If that fails, try to explain it with screenshots and how to reproduce it. Then the devs can see for themselves, and probably figure out what's going on much faster. Good luck!

Ooops.. While I was at it, I kinda did it to two.... You know, to gather... empirical data... just like ArmA 3 damage improvement testing.... So are you coming to purge the heresy or what? Will I be given the emperors mercy?

Hey @oukej! I raise your meme to the next level. Here is some real SubmunCeption for ya! A picture of a helmet, penetrated by submunitions infront of your meme about putting submunitions into the submunitions of ur submunitions, because you heard I like submunitions! (Yep, it's actually the result of a small hollow charge after penetrating a 7cm steel plate. Oh, and there used to be a watermelon in there, couldn't find it afterwards.)

"Where actual valuable feedback, is just as random as tank damage"

Aha. So if you are really far away, it basically goes into kindof a "cruise mode" and once it reaches that high min distance, it dives down, but still at a comparatively shallow angle compared to say a Titan?

A lot of transparent news @oukej. I really appreciate that you took the time to answer some of these concerns. It's also nice to hear that you are looking into the armor configs and damage handling. It seems like the DLC is pushing quite hard now toward release, and of course getting things polished is more important than re-inventing damage mechanics. But, I firmly believe that the ArmA 3 hit registration and damage system can be re-purposed into dealing with damage in a more immersive and realistic way :) And seriously, I don't mind spending some hours grinding data and reproducing the same shots over and over. It becomes necessary to establish confirmation of improvement and consistency, so don't hesitate to ask if you need someone to volunteer to gather data and do extensive testing. :) Edit: LMAO didn't click the meme link until now. Almost dieded, like if a grazing apfsds hit my kuma!