Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

subs17

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    449

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by subs17

  2. Posted

    Yes, but the damage system on A2 was much better than it is on A3

     

    Arma1 ACE was the best balance of the two for damage modeling as you could still be healed using bandages and Morphine and the first aid tent. Ideally a balance needs to be struck where the player can take a hit and be able to be healed completely while still behaving realistically to the type of wound inflicted to a degree. ACE did quite well with complaints and groans by the player when he was injured and screams but at the same time you have wounded AI in ACE1 for Arma 1 that still posed a threat after being shot.

  3. Posted

    It's perfectly normal for some games to model some gameplay/features better/different than others. One game cannot possibly be everyone's answer.

     

    I might answer with why don't other games do what ArmA does well. But that would compel me to making a list, but that would be huge and that I just don't have the time :)

     

    But in the first instance I might direct you to the video in my signature.

    If you look at previous versions of Arma in comparison the devs have added features over time and the sim has evolved so new ideas/wish lists are not a bad idea as the devs can add features to the sim and that's the good thing about Arma. One thing that has always been a feature though is Arma being the most realistic FPS along with VBS.

    • Like 1

  4. Posted

    The Mk14 is an M14, the Navid is an HK121, the SPMG is a General Dynamics LWMMG, the Mk1 EMR is a Sig 556 DMR chambered in 7.62 NATO.

     

     

    First of all, I am almost positive that previous versions of ACE did not factor the rotation of the earth into ballistics calculations. Everything else is still in Arma 3 and ACE 3. 

     

     

    Thanks I had no idea they approached it like that its a pity that the devs have to approach it like that because of companies and their lawyers a similar situation has happened with DCS although some devs have got permission from companies to make the aircraft as realistic as possible. I wonder if someone could mod the A3 to add a 2nd list of weapons with those same weapons and kit with their RL weaposn names?

  6. Posted

    I want to throw a duckling into a puddle of water every time I read someone write that ArmA3 is less realistic because it doesn't use the same weapons as any other shooter game on the market.

     

    With the older Arma versions the ballistics could be modeled accurately based off real weapons and sights and later mods such as ACE allowed more realistic application of real world computations for accurate weapons use. For example the bullets trajectory with factors such as wind, tgt movement, beaten zone, rotation of the Earth could be modeled pretty close to the real thing. So modeling of weapons that don't exist IRL sort of moves away from Arma being considered the most realistic FPS, so its not that other games have different weapons its the modeling of weapons that exist IRL that are not fictional that would be a nice addon for A3 or future versions of Arma. For ACE2 there was the Kestrel and also range tables etc for certain weapons I recall and that's where the content of the sim becomes a lot better and the realism is the best thing about Arma.

  7. Posted

    I know that, and limtation with a realistic visual damage (gore) but it's another complicated subject.

     

    Gore is not a problem as you can have different settings and have more gore for those that want it.

     

    The problem with realism is the lack of actual weapons that exist IRL and this is where BIs Arma has become unrealistic. You compare it to the earlier versions Arma1/Arma2 and OFP had modern day weapons that actually exist so those sims are regarded as more realistic. Maybe BI should do an addon for A3 which brings that sort of content back to arma3 so then people would say what is the most realistic FPS Arma3. So the OFP/Arma1/Arma2 approach with basic training had that sort of approach with the big plus mods like ACE. The marksman DLC should be extremely realistic but do any of those weaposn exist IRL? So how can it be regarded as realistic when such a weapon does not exist the addon has some cool stuff like to be able to lean on a vehicle for stability but how about the ballistics of the weapon being modeled how can you model it realistically is it based off another weapon that exists IRL? How about weight of the weapon and that effect on the players stamina? So there is areas here that could improve Arma3 and get back on that pedestal.

  12. Posted

    Was it ace ?

    ACE artillery was amazing it made artillery truly powerful not unlike real life but due to the complexity it was a viable option for TVT and co-op modes.

    The artillery computer of arma 3 has got to go.

    ACE mod is awesome I actually use ACE more than any other FPS the realism it adds to A1/2 is extremely addictive I hope such a mod is one day made for A3.:cool:

  13. Posted

    Hopefully one day we'll see a return of current in service equipment and older weapons from A2/A1 because the futuristic setting is not as good to me since it takes the sim away from sim in some cases and is more scifi themed. Back with A1/2 when we had ACE mod for those versions of Arma I could relate to the equipment/weapons since it is in service or was at some point and also you could check out the equipment capabilities and with mods like ACE you had the ability to use those capabilities. With a futuristic version we see unrealistic weapons or capabilities and moves away from the original sim Arma and I'd consider arcady. By adding a marksman dlc how can it be regarded as realistic when the weapons are scifi perhaps they could at some point model something that is in service today that would give such a dlc credibility. Ideally I'd prefer if Bis worked alongside Eagle dynamics and made the ultimate FPS/hardcore sim that kicked arse than head in the futuristic scifi theme that its heading in. It wasn't that long ago I saw a video of an Arma 2 mod that accurately simulated real life artillery including using maps and compasses and the original sim did in some missions actually force the player to resort to using a map and compass.

  16. Posted · Edited by SUBS17

    Well I guess we're somewhat on the same page now. By sprint I don't mean a sprint start followed by a fast cruise. I just mean the sprint part. And that is really hard to keep up for much longer than a minute (400m). A fast cruise is not the sprint pace in arma.

    More pacing options would be awesome. But we don't have em... there is however a way to overcome this. That's by using a combination of jogging and walking. Jog 10 seconds, walk 3, with weapons lowered and you will be set to run forever at a fast pace. If you manage your pace well you can easily maintain a low fatigue throughout a session. If you just go all out, well you will burn out quickly. Whether you are an average joe, a basic grunt, SAS, or Olympic runner, keeping proper pace is necessary to being able to run long distances.

    In combat soldier are sprinting alot, but not constantly in order to avoid getting shot. To avoid getting shot, they stay in cover (which also allows you to catch your breath... just like in arma).

    Hey man, I was merely disagreeing with you. I don't see how I was narrowing down the discussion, or being closed minded more than anyone else expressing their opinion here. Trust, BI has not struck my personal taste. I aint circle jerking with anyone. I just genuinely disagreed with your suggestion to make the sway not mount up as quickly due to fatigue.

    The main reason behind this is because it means that anaerobic activities like short sprints, carrying alot of gear, or rapidly ducking in an out of cover will really have no immediate consequence to a player's ability to engage someone accurately. In reality that kind of activity gets the blood pumping, your breathing somewhat heavy, and your muscles fatigued - your not going to be shooting at your best for a couple of moments. Just like in game now. That is not something that you have to wait until you are halfway to exhaustion to experience. All it takes is a short sprint.

    Yet, If you make it so sway increase less, or in a linear relationship to fatigue, you will barely notice sway increase until fatigue gets to high levels, Ie. 50%. So the in the above situations, where you should be less effective immediately after a sprint, or ducking in and out of cover etc., it would no longer work that way. You wouldn't really notice anything until you have significantly fatigued.

    I personally rarely go above 20% fatigue. If you make it so sway ramps up slowly, rather than suddenly like now, I won't ever really have a significant sway increase at all. I would be sprinting, ducking, stopping and engaging with pretty much just as much accuracy as someone who was totally rested and motionless, provided I maintained fatigue less than around 50%. I don't think that's right.

    Of course I would be all for a more indepth system that made more strenuous activities have quicker sway penalties with representation of aerobic/anaerobic activity... but that is far more than a tweak. And that is not the suggestion I originally disagreed with.

    To describe how it is what happens is you run as fast as possible for example and what the body does if you're fit is allows you under those conditions to maintain that speed for certain time, as people get tired the speed drops back but does not stop. If a person is blowing their ass and finding it hard to keep up their body does not stop or collapse what happens is they drop to a slower run to a jog and then to a walk. So that's when everyone else has to reduce their speed so that they remain together or leave them behind in order to get to where they are going. Carrying a load reduces the top speed and means that you'll decay quicker and wind up walking in some situations also terrain factor so down hill you move quicker, level ground is ok but the steeper an incline the greater the effect on your speed and forests/bush also are a big factor. Some situations where you are pushing yourself you might throw up but its only a combination of factors that make a person collapse in other words lack of fluids and being pushed to hard can result in that but its very rare. Walking pace is also in different speeds as well so walking fast "forced march" is very quick

    forced march (plural forced marches)

    1.(military) A movement on foot by soldiers or military prisoners, who must, in order to satisfy a military requirement, travel at a speed or in adverse conditions that would normally tire them excessively.  [quotations ▼]

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10781974

    In the first day of the selection process, hopefuls faced a 2.4km run, 30 push ups, 66 curl ups, a 5m rope climb then had to climb a 1.8m wall.

    They also must complete battle efficiency training which involved running 8km in under one hour and 12 minutes carrying 35kg.

    So maybe the modelling of stamina could be reduced speed from sprint to run to eventual walk but were talking kilometres for running and then walking unless you're modelling a soldier who is unfit lol.

    ---------- Post added at 10:07 ---------- Previous post was at 10:02 ----------

    From the title of this thread, the Fatigue system is fine. It can use a few improvements here and there, and with the addition of the Marksman DLC, I can expect that but it's fine for now. You can't really define fatigue for everyone, because everyone is different. Some people think soldiers can run for ever, others will say they run too far in game with the amount of gear on. It's a game guys, and where it is right now is almost perfect. You can run far with little gear, and short bursts with heavy gear. The most important thing that most people forget or refuses to do is rest. I've watched countless YouTube videos of guys jogging 3 m/ph because the refuse to stop and rest and start cursing their aim all because thy didn't take a few seconds the catch their breath. This is exactly what the Bootcamp DLC was for but well, that's their fault when they die on the battlefield. So fatigue system? It's realistic from the stand point that it's a game. Nuff said.

    IRL a trained soldier would still after running long distance be able to hit the tgt and a marksman or sniper would still have an accurate aim because that's what they train for only a basic recruit would suffer to much from a run to hit the tgt. I mean a sniper it is his job lol.

    I have an idea character class fitness so it would go pogue(the current level), then grunt, then Special Forces, then NZ Special Forces.

  17. Posted

    That's not what this guy said

    Well hes not in the NZ army now is he.

    That's just recruits:

    Heres the SAS

    Fitness and navigation (4 weeks)[edit]

    Based at Sennybridge Training Camp in Wales personnel are exposed to the Brecon Beacons and the Elan Valley, Wales where weather conditions are demanding, and unpredictable.

    Initial tests are common to the rest of the British Armed Forces with the Combat Fitness Test (CFT), a 2.4 kilometres (1.5 mi) run in under 9 minutes 30 seconds proceded by a minimum of 45 pressups and 55 situps in two minutes each.

    The first week of selection consists of runs in the Brecon Beacons, up and down hills with a loaded bergen. These exercises, such as the "Fan Dance", are further complicated by navigation and map reading exercises. Navigation runs in small groups in woodland areas and night tabs follow shortly, steadily increasing both the physical and mental load on the prospective operator. Loads increase over the period, while the individual's personal weapon has to be carried unsupported; candidates are required to keep the rifle in their hands as they climb slopes and jog down again.

    In the third week individuals navigate from a grid reference to other points on the map, in an exercise called "Point to Point". Directing staff at each rendezvous ("RV") require the candidate to indicate location before instructing the next reference point.

    The final stage of the "hills" phase of selection is known as "Test Week" which consists of six marches on consecutive days with ever increasing bergen weights and distances. The second to last day involves covering 35 kilometres (22 mi) with a hand-drawn sketch map rather than a printed map. Test week concludes with "Endurance", a 64 km (40miles) march across the Brecon Beacons, completed in less than 20 hours loaded in excess of fifty five pounds plus water, food and rifle.

    ---------- Post added at 10:55 ---------- Previous post was at 10:49 ----------

    I think you misunderstand what I am saying though. Some elite SAS soldier can probably travel days on days with minimal water sleep and food. They can probably achieve a remarkable pace and carry quite a bit of gear while doing that. They are truly impressive. But when it comes to a sprint, nobody can keep it up indefinitely. Sprinting, especially while carrying alot of weight, is anearobic, and you can only do continuous anaerobic activites for so long before the muscles become engorged in lactic acid and you can't use them well until it dissipates.

    There is a difference between a fast pace, and a full out sprint. And when you hear all those amazing stories of soldier covering miles upon miles of ground, they are going at a controlled and steady pace. Not sprinting full out. And in arma it is very easy to maintain a controlled pace, literally forever without going above 10% fatigue.

    And regarding fitness tests, I think you should actually try reproducing them in arma. You might be suprised that at least standard ones, are quite passable ingame.

    That's whats missing in Arma is the ability to run at different paces for an all out sprint a soldier should be able to sprint 2.4km (clean)although it is a sprint start but then a very fast cruise. With kit and under fire they sprint the whole time while fighting otherwise you'll get shot and that goes for everyone. And IRL the last thing you'll do is collapse and faint after 500m lol if you're trained.

  18. Posted

    Gotta disagree. Firstly the effect can easily be handled through hold breath or taking a few short seconds to catch your breath. Secondly, What's the point of managing fatigue and load if its not going to have an effect on your combat performance?

    Well yeah... if they were walking. And hey, in arma you can cover 50km and end up at 0 fatigue if you pace yourself. But even a badass SAS will burn out after 400m of full out sprinting, especially with gear. You must understand the different effects sprinting vs jogging vs marching vs walking a distance has...?

    No he bloody wont otherwise he'd be RTUed or if it were selection he'd fail selection and be binned. If you do your research and ask the right questions you'll find these guys are way fitter IRL than whats modelled in Arma. Try reading Bravo 2 zero, The one that got away or any of those other books or check out Bear Grilzs when he tried out for the French Foreign Legion and you'll see that incomparison Arma models a very unfit character who would fail a basic fitness test lol.

  19. Posted

    Hello,

    I created a PvP mission and I haven't done any modifications to the ArmA 3 fatigue system. As a consequence players started to complain because some other missions use some kind of fatigue reduction / tweaking.

    This discussion is not about whether the fatigue system is good for gameplay (because I think "gamepaly" it is too vast subject to discuss about and will not give me the answer I am looking for) or about whether you like playing with it or not.

    I want to know your opinion about how far is the fatigue system from an ideal "fatigue system" that is closest to reality according to your belief and facts you are aware of.

    The poll has 3 options:

    1) too easy = overall soldier fatigue is too small compared to what happens in the real world and must be fixed

    2) balanced = fatigue system is realistic enough and it doesn't need any major fixing

    3) too hard = overall soldier fatigue is too much compared to what happens in the real world and must be fixed

    Please provide facts in this discussion with the following method:

    1) provide ArmA 3 test results

    2) provide real world test results

    For both cases provide test parameters and result:

    A) distance in meters

    B) terrain (flat, hill, etc)

    C) running (running, sprinting, walking, combat pace)

    D) weapon (rifle, handgun, launcher, lowered, raised, etc)

    E) weight (value returned by loadAbs or kg)

    F) gear (weapons, items, magazines, uniforms, backpacks, etc)

    RESULT: value of "getFatigue player" and./or appreciation of fatigue state (speed, aiming, weapon sway, etc)

    Here is an example of a test done in ArmA 3 (I used kg = loadAbs / 9.82 formula for weight):

    BASIC TEST - common gear #1

    ===========================

    A) same as before

    B) same as before

    C) same as before

    D) no weapon

    E) 124 loadAbs (12.63 kg)

    F) gear: "U_O_SpecopsUniform_ocamo" + map + radio + watch + compass + uav terminal + binocular

    RESULT: 23% fatigue

    BASIC TEST - common gear #2

    ===========================

    A) same as before

    B) same as before

    C) same as before

    D) no weapon

    E) 84 loadAbs (8.55 kg)

    F) gear: "U_I_CombatUniform" + map + radio + watch + compass + uav terminal + binocular

    RESULT: 21% fatigue

    ASSAULT SOLDIER #1

    ==================

    A) same as before

    B) same as before

    C) same as before

    D) lowered rifle

    E) 482 loadAbs (49.1 kg)

    F) gear:

    ["arifle_MX_GL_Black_F","hgun_P07_F","Laserdesignator"],

    ["30Rnd_65x39_caseless_mag","30Rnd_65x39_caseless_mag","30Rnd_65x39_caseless_mag","30Rnd_65x39_caseless_mag","16Rnd_9x21_Mag","16Rnd_9x21_Mag","HandGrenade","HandGrenade","SmokeShell","SmokeShellGreen",

    "Laserbatteries","1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_Smoke_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_SmokeGreen_Grenade_shell"],

    ["","","optic_Hamr"],[],["","",""],

    ["30Rnd_65x39_caseless_mag"],[],["16Rnd_9x21_Mag"],

    ["FirstAidKit"],

    ["ItemMap","ItemCompass","ItemWatch","ItemRadio","ItemGPS","Laserdesignator"],

    "U_I_CombatUniform_shortsleeve","V_PlateCarrierIA1_dgtl","","H_HelmetSpecB_paint1",""]

    RESULT: 91% fatigue (60% fatigue after around half the distance ~600m)

    ASSAULT SOLDIER #2

    ==================

    A) same as before

    B) same as before

    C) same as before

    D) lowered rifle

    E) 552 loadAbs (56.2 kg)

    F) gear:

    ["arifle_Katiba_GL_F","hgun_Rook40_F","Laserdesignator"],

    ["30Rnd_65x39_caseless_green","30Rnd_65x39_caseless_green","30Rnd_65x39_caseless_green","30Rnd_65x39_caseless_green","16Rnd_9x21_Mag","16Rnd_9x21_Mag","HandGrenade","HandGrenade","SmokeShell","SmokeShellGreen",

    "Laserbatteries","1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_Smoke_Grenade_shell","1Rnd_SmokeGreen_Grenade_shell"],

    ["","","optic_Arco"],[],["","",""],

    ["30Rnd_65x39_caseless_green"],[],["16Rnd_9x21_Mag"],

    ["FirstAidKit"],

    ["ItemMap","ItemCompass","ItemWatch","ItemRadio","ItemGPS","Laserdesignator"],

    "U_O_CombatUniform_ocamo","V_PlateCarrier1_blk","","H_HelmetLeaderO_ocamo",""];

    RESULT: 97% fatigue (60% fatigue after around half the distance ~600m)

    You missed one other option, is the fatigue system realistic compared to a real life professional soldier and the answer is no, it is not realistic as a trained soldier in my country is far more fitter than whats modelled. And that's just an average solder just off basic training as for SAS and special forces they are much stronger and faster and capable of covering greater distances in shorter time while carrying more.

    600m for a soldier is nothing as in = 0 fatigue, you're just warming up...;)

    Also fatigue affect of accuracy of weapons also seems unrealistic, should not be so badly fatigued in order to aim accurately....even after running 10km.

  23. Posted

    How stealth works is it reduces the radar reflection to the size that is quite small, for the F117 the RCS is that of a pebble. So radar modelling needs for detection to be extremely close for the radar to pick up the stealth aircraft. For defeating IR missiles you can also have IR jammers on the aircraft which burn out the seeker of the missile. The most modern missile protection system EODAS can detect missile launches and enemy aircraft from 360 degrees around the aircraft. As well as that you can combine them with settings on the countermeasures and it automatically pops chaff/flares when a missile is launched and operates a jammer as well in some aircraft. So for A3 maybe have a stealth configuration for the aircraft where all pylons are removed and there maybe stealth pods containing the bombs/missiles and internal bomb bays would only be used. With that the radar detection range should be far smaller for the AI/players unless the aircraft is physically seen. You want a good balance so just popping one flare should not defeat the missile it should be at least 5-6 for an IR missile.

    ---------- Post added at 13:57 ---------- Previous post was at 13:46 ----------

    Stealth is irrelevant at ArmA engagement ranges. At 5km a raptor or F-117 can be acquired and shot down like anything else. Maybe the missile seeker will have reduced performance, but that's it.

    Remember that the F-117 was acquired at 32km by an ancient Sa-3, purely because the radar operator knew just where to look.

    A lot of things happened for that aircraft to be shot down but it wasn't the case in Desert Storm or OEF where none were lost.

    Only one F-117 (AF ser. no. 82-0806) was lost to enemy action. It was shot down during a mission against the Army of Yugoslavia on 27 March 1999, during Operation Allied Force.[46] About 8:15 pm local time, SA-3s were fired from about 8 miles (13 km) away, launched by a Yugoslav version of the Soviet Isayev S-125 "Neva" (NATO name SA-3 "Goa") anti-aircraft missile system.[46][47][48] The launcher was run by elements of the 3rd Battalion of the 250th Air Defence Missile Brigade under the command of Colonel Zoltán Dani.[49] According to Dani in a 2007 interview, his troops spotted the aircraft on radar when its bomb-bay doors opened, raising its radar signature.[50] One source states one of the missiles detonated by its proximity fuze near the F-117.[46] Dani said he kept most of his missile sites intact by frequently moving them, and had spotters looking for F-117s and other NATO aircraft. He also stated that he oversaw the modification of his targeting radar to improve its detection capability.[48]

    Canopy of F-117 shot down in Serbia in March 1999 at the Museum of Aviation in Belgrade

    After the explosion, the aircraft became uncontrollable, forcing the pilot to eject.[46] The pilot was recovered six hours later by a USAF para-rescue team.[51][46] Photos show that the aircraft struck the ground at low speed in an inverted position, and that the airframe remained relatively intact.[46] The Serbs invited Russian personnel to inspect the aircraft's remains, compromising the then 25-year-old U.S. stealth technology.[52] The F-117's pilot was initially misidentified. While the name "Capt Ken 'Wiz' Dwelle" was painted on the canopy, it was revealed in 2007 that the pilot was Lt. Col. Dale Zelko.[53][54] The stealth technology from the downed F-117 may have been acquired by Russia and China.[55]

    Some American sources claim that a second F-117A was damaged during the same campaign, allegedly on 30 April;[56] the aircraft returned to base, but it supposedly never flew again.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F117

    He had his bomb bay doors open.:rolleyes:

  24. Posted · Edited by SUBS17

    LOAL has been around for a few decades and it fits with a future warfare theme although they could later model older weapons that may require more attention to how weapons are employed. ECM is not that difficult to model and neither is HOJ if its just basic noise jamming. The better way though for weapons could be also the interface of how they are used so for off boresight IR missiles you might have JHCMs helmet display and that particular mode on a button. You still have to with JHCMs place the reticle on the enemy aircraft and push lock. So its not spam locking you have to see it, be in the mode and place the reticle to lock and fire. I think basing the aircraft weapons employment similar to FC3s aircraft would be simple yet practical. Another good sim is BMS or F4AF where you can see an even better example of such systems being used in a sim. Normally though off boresight weapons are only used when both aircraft are merged and WVR, often the BVR missiles do the job unless its 2 groups and that have closed in on each other in the fight. Other things a JHCMS system could do is place a markpoint on the ground for CAS and have JHCMS/HUD markers to indicate direction and distance to help the pilot for things like CAS.

    Radar modes are important and detail in that area would greatly improve Arma3s aircraft so you have in the F-16 Velocity search, Track While scan, Range while scan, Single Target Track and Dogfight mode. Each mode is useful in its own way most common though is RWS/TWS/STT and Dogfight, RWS gives you a broad picture of the scan ahead of the aircraft showing contacts distance/speed and direction, TWS allows the pilot to lock onto one aircraft or more while tracking those aircraft in the scan area. STT only tracks one tgt only giving data on direction/altitude/speed while dogfight automatically locks onto the tgt in the search area and allows gun and IR missile calculations. As well as radar modes the aircraft need IFF which is sort of already in some versions of arma, in aircraft like the F35 the IFF is automatic and shows aircraft as red or green and can show the information in the helmet even outside the aircrafts radar scan pattern thanks to the EODAS.

    The Five Stages of a BVR Engagement

    The five basic stages in chronological order are:

    Awareness and Detection

    Sorting

    Intercept

    Defensive Response

    Kill Confirmation

    So when flying with a Squadron we go through this process in order to sort out whos going to shoot at what aircraft and on the radar display the tools need to be there in order for a realistic modelling of the engagement. Its not just lock and shoot we have to follow the above sequence in order for the intercept to be accomplished. So for that to work in A3 we need a decent radar, HSD and RWR to support the weapons and give the best chance against the enemy.

    Awareness and Detection

    For this we use the Radar, eyeball and the RWR. The RWR is handy because although an aircraft cannot be detected by the radar due to its position outside the radar scan pattern it will emit its radar and the RWR will detect it and give an indication of what the aircraft type is and direction. From there the pilot only has to adjust his scan area to detect it on the radar and start tracking it. (if ECM is on then you might not get a lock until you achieve burn through which is where the radar penetrates the jamming and can lock the enemy aircraft.) You also want a zoom feature so there might be a formation of enemy aircraft in TWS you lock one and then zoom and now you can work out how many aircraft are in the formation. Also a radar can in some aircraft like the F-16/F-15 identify an enemy aircraft by the radar reflecting off the turbine blades/shape of the aircraft(NCTR-Non Co-operative Target Recognition).

  25. Posted

    The Aim9X has whats called LOAL (Lock on after launch) and can hit anything at 90 degrees around the aircraft, Pythons can do 180 degrees off boresight so they can be fired at aircraft behind you. Delays for LOAL instant so there is no delay there, for a normal lock it takes only a few seconds if uncaged, if caged to a radar lock then its a few seconds but less than that of uncaged because the missile already knows where to look. All of the stuff that I mentioned fits with Arma3 as ECM could be just noise jamming and HOJ is just a missile that homes in on ECM jamming. I think neither would be that difficult for the devs, ideally FC3 level is a realistic level for Arma as at that level you have practical employment of the ordnance in a realistic manner. Going DCS level is ideal but not necessary for game play. Also they could model a type of AWACs which would allow a futuristic fighter the equivalent to labels on if you were in such an aircraft. (like the F35 IRL) BTW don't compare the A-10Cs Air to Air missiles because although they are practical for that aircraft an F-15/SU27 can lock and fire its missiles quicker because of the radar.(A-10C does not have radar but its targeting pod does have an Air to Air mode)

×