Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

dragon01

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    2030

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Everything posted by dragon01

  1. dragon01
    For all the good it does us with your build server on a fritz... :)
  2. dragon01
    They're both NATO weapons, so it makes little sense. The Skyfire rocket is the DAR's CSAT equivalent, and it works pretty much the same.
  3. dragon01
    It's nice, but BIS has limited programming resources allocated to A3. This would be a mod-only feature, so I think that at this point, it doesn't make sense for them to work on it.
  4. dragon01
    Note, this kind of control is not how all tanks are controlled. Modern designs use a steering yoke, more often than not. Dual-stick controls are mostly used on older Soviet tanks, up to T-90. Armata, for instance, has a yoke, as does the Abrams. I don't know about Merkava, but given the timeframe, it's highly likely that tanks in ArmA3 are all equipped with a yoke and steer a lot like cars.
  5. dragon01
    Why don't you run the game and try it? When rangefinder is equipped, [T] takes a range reading, and LMB toggles the designator laser. It's that simple. You can range regardless of whether the designator is on or off.
  6. dragon01
    No, it doesn't. The two functions are completely independent.
  7. dragon01
    You already have LGBs for that purpose. Or Scalpels, which can be loaded onto any jet that can carry the Macer, and in greater quantity. In practice, their effectiveness is similar.
  8. dragon01
    Buzzard can carry rockets. I don't know about iron bombs, but check the innermost pylons. They're the only ones that can carry large ordnance such as bombs.
  9. dragon01
    Quite the contrary, this is a very good idea. Titan should be IR-only (makes sense for a missile that has both AA and AT variants), while Scalpel and DAGR make sense to be laser-guided. I've suggested that before. It makes absolutely no sense to have "all in one" missiles. As for manual guidance, give Jian some love. As of now, it's not even on dynamic loadout lists (and the CSAT drone from Apex still doesn't have dynamic loadouts, either). Of course, that would make using DAGR and Scalpel out of helos somewhat difficult. That said, if you could eke out some modeling time, an air-launched Titan variant (or two, for AA and AT) could be added. Or, you could add multiple variants or each missile, with different seekers (both Hellfire and Maverick are good RL examples). That would allow people to keep using their favorite tactic while forcing them to consider what they're bringing on the mission. Another alternative, which might be difficult to implement, would be to fix AI gunner targeting with a laser designator.
  10. dragon01
    Yeah, ranging is a separate kind of laser, both IRL and in ArmA. For a sniper team to have the laser lit (knowing there's CAS flying around the area) while ranging targets would be very irresponsible of them. IRL, someone would be having their heads on a platter back at the base.
  11. dragon01
    True, but I found that you can actually use CCIP quite well for that purpose. Simply fly high, level off, line up with your target and go into TGP. Don't lock it, just center the CCIP cross in it. Once it passes over the target, drop the bombs. That's a somewhat WWII-era approach to bombing, but it works well enough. In ArmA, you won't normally reach an altitude from which CCRP is typically used, anyway.
  12. dragon01
    For a guided bomb. I was specifically talking iron bombs. A.k.a. unguided, or dumb. We have those in A3 and they should have a bit of spread.
  13. dragon01

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    dragon01 replied to soul_assassin's topic in ARMA 3 - ADDONS & MODS: COMPLETE

    So it is a bug after all? I couldn't find any info on what color BMP cannon tracers actually are, so I assumed it really is different between AP and HE for whatever reason. Guess not.
  14. dragon01
    I wouldn't be against giving bombs a bit of a spread. We've got that for rockets, and being able to nail a target pretty much exactly from level flight (you can use the TGP for level bombing) with an iron bomb is odd.
  15. dragon01
    BIS SACLOS works OK against ground targets. I don't know what's the problem with aircraft, but IRL, manual SACLOS doesn't work well for fixed wing, anyway. It does OK against slow-flying helos, which is what IRL examples are good, too. For serious anti-air with command-guided missiles you need some kind of radar assist.
  16. dragon01
    Or, once LWR systems are implemented, drop the bomb in the general area around the target, then lase it shortly before bomb impact. It now works quite well and will direct the bomb to the target just fine. That's how it's done IRL.
  17. dragon01
    If you check the first gif, it appears that the "top" attack mode actually follows something more like the direct trajectory (no altitude hold period), and the direct mode launches straight ahead like an RPG. I guess there's room for improvement here.
  18. dragon01
    In fact, I found that top-down attack mode is, right now, not very effective. Maybe it's just that the armor is WIP, but it seems that Titan missiles have lost some of their firepower in general.
  19. dragon01
    I know animations are a chore, but the way AT is handled now when going prone tends to give people a lot of grief. It's not even a about firing, but being able to do anything with AT in prone position. Not to mention accidentally switching to launcher when prone...
  20. dragon01

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    dragon01 replied to soul_assassin's topic in ARMA 3 - ADDONS & MODS: COMPLETE

    They'll probably look cool in their own way, but yeah, the current gear looks like it does for a reason. I'd expect exosuits to look more like ones from STALKER (basically, modern body armor on exosuit frame) than any of those mockups. In particular, any kind of bulky helmet will be absolutely detested by troops that have to do any sort of shooting. Try going into an airsoft match in a paintball helmet and see how well you'll fare (speaking from experience here, I was a bit short on gear back then :) ). Adaptive camouflage sounds great, but it also sounds like something that stops being any good after a week of crawling through mud and dust, either due to electrical failure or, well, being covered by mud and dust. Fancy electronics belong more on vehicles than personal equipment, which, first of all, has to be reliable in the field.
  21. dragon01

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    dragon01 replied to soul_assassin's topic in ARMA 3 - ADDONS & MODS: COMPLETE

    Which isn't to say it would be awesome to see that guy face someone dressed like that (well, maybe in some less ugly camo): ArmA4, maybe? :)
  22. dragon01

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    dragon01 replied to soul_assassin's topic in ARMA 3 - ADDONS & MODS: COMPLETE

    Just found some more info. Sound a lot like FFW, actually. It'd interesting to see if it works out. On one hand, it does look kind of far fetched. On the other, Russians have a habit of keeping cool things under wraps until they're pretty sure they can actually pull them off... We'll see. That said, I don't think the final result will look a lot like the mockup.
  23. dragon01

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    dragon01 replied to soul_assassin's topic in ARMA 3 - ADDONS & MODS: COMPLETE

    That looks cool. Kind of like the old Future Force Warrior concept (is that a powered exosuit?). Wouldn't be surprised if it ends up going its way, too. Still, it does look cool. It also reminds me of CTRG stealth gear and vanilla CSAT. Except actually cool-looking. :) Well, as far as "real" Ratnik goes, what I want from it are the TI sights. RHS could use more of those in general.
  24. dragon01

    AI Driving - Feedback topic

    dragon01 replied to klamacz's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH

    Because there are too few AI devs around in general. This is not a common thing for a programmer to be able to do. AI is one of the most maddeningly complex issues in computer science. Even if we're not talking Turing-level AI, both AI-related courses I could find in my uni are big, though ones 60 solid hours of lectures and computer lab time (in addition to a lot of work at home), and I suspect it's no different on other universities. Consequently, high demand+low supply=high price. That's how market works. It may be too high for BIS or not, but I suspect a good AI developer can cherry-pick between a host of gaming and non-gaming companies, so whether you get one may well depend more on whether someone like this feels like working on ArmA and not, say, chess or go playing bots.
  25. dragon01

    AI Driving - Feedback topic

    dragon01 replied to klamacz's topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH

    That's pretty much it. AI development is its own separate specialty. Asking an artist to work on AI is like asking an ecologist to do theoretical physics, just because he's a scientist. Right now, they're messing with sound and art, because that's the guys they don't need to work on Enfusion (since they're developing the engine itself, not the assets). Thus, the sound and art teams are probably the only ones which were not gutted for that reason. I suspect this is also why Tanks DLC is going to be light on new features, but is going to include a monumental task of making functional interiors for every AV in game.
×