Jump to content

dragon01

Member
  • Content Count

    1999
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Everything posted by dragon01

  1. dragon01

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    Prop planes can be loud, all right. Super Tucano, in particular, is a turboprop, makes quite a racket at full power. Jets too, in fact, jets should be even louder, much more so than they are now, but A3 plays fast and loose with those things. What is needed is fixing the AI so that it knows how to use it. It can't be fired on the move because it's a SACLOS missile with a non-stabilized sight. You'd never hit anything when moving at anything but a snail's pace, anyway.
  2. Actually, with VBIEDs, I think that was less of a problem with small arms fire not getting through the armor, but rather with it being unable to detonate the IED. If you shoot up the engine of a bomb truck coming at you... well, you still have a bomb truck coming at you, only now without an engine, which is of little help if it had already gotten close. It can't blow you up if it's shot to pieces, which is what GMGs are good for. This "hillbilly armor" was, in reality, never good for much. It could have some effect on RPGs if mounted some distance from the hull, to create a makeshift spaced armor, but without a solid backing plate that won't work, either.
  3. For jets (and also meaningful naval operations), you really need something like 100x100km (TOH-sized) maps. For ArmA4, I'd very much love to see something like that, but making a map like that detailed enough for infantry operations is nontrivial, to say the least. An option would be setting the game in a desert (something like the Persian Gulf, with lots of water on one side), which would allow concentrated high-detail areas with plenty of open space between them.
  4. What happened to the attempt at porting TOH maps to A3? I remember it being mentioned here a long time ago as being WIP. Was that project abandoned, or is it still going on behind the scenes?
  5. dragon01

    ARMA 3 Addon Request Thread

    Are you sure it isn't the Contact DLC respirator? It looks remarkably similar.
  6. That picture proves my point. There is no way to fully conceal a heat signature, especially of a running engine. I do know what I'm talking about, seeing as not only do I study physics, I've got quite a few hours logged in flight sims. You clearly either didn't give camo nets a try, or you're trying to use Tanoa ones on Livonia, which will not work too well. The problem in ArmA is that everything that is not a unit or vehicle has the exact same temperature, so anything that is warm stands out. IRL, thermal imaging is not nearly as good. The bottom line is: if you're getting killed by jets, stock up on AA weapons. The truth is, aircraft really are that powerful, and it's very hard to hide a tank from them. If they know, roughly, where to look for you, you're toast, camo net or not. You can't prevent them from locking onto you (even with a cold engine) and you're unlikely to prevent them from finding you. Planes and attack helos kill tanks, that's just how the world works.
  7. Not true. They should work against IR to a degree, and depending on the environment (just like real camo) can make a tank much harder to spot at long range. It's impossible to make anything better on the ArmA3 engine, and besides, no camo is perfect.
  8. Camo netting has been in game since Tanks DLC came out.
  9. Amazing work. Just one request, could a runway be added to the Vietnam-era airfield in the east part of the map? It's not much of an airfield, but bush planes like An-2 can be operated from it, it'd be great if AI could do that, too.
  10. dragon01

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    As far as the info goes, this is taken from discussions with actual pilots and longtime simmers on Falcon BMS forums. 14kft (which translates to 4.2km) is for an F-16C with LANTIRN (I think, the guy didn't elaborate on the pod). This is indeed out of MANPADS range, but not out of flak ceiling, which makes for a hair-raising bombing experience. I suppose you could get above 20kft with a more modern pod (and you still won't quite be out of flak, the biggest guns can get you above 30kft, well into JDAM-land). This also depends on weather, clouds and fog will mess up your paint even if you can see through. Also note that I said "self-lased" for a reason, with buddy or JTAC lasing you could drop from halfway up to space and still hit. As for Paveway II lasing time, the advice I've heard was more like 10-12s, and Paveway III will miss more likely than not if you use the same settings, a bane of many a BMS newbie. 🙂 Lasing LGBs is not nearly as easy or sure-fire as people make it out to be. If you're good, you can send one down a chimney, but you can still screw it up. All LGBs glide, because they're released at speed, and they have control surfaces. When dropping from level flight, your plane will have an angle of attack, which means the bomb will have an angle of attack, which means lift (to say nothing of lofting them, which is doable, if tricky). For PII, The difference between "pretty much ballistic" and "very much ballistic" is enough to make for a bomb several hundred feet long if you try to drop it without guiding. PIIIs are worse than that, if they don't see the laser early on, they'll generally cruise off into the wild blue yonder and blow up some hapless civilians way long of the target.
  11. dragon01

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    I'll note that it's actually a realistic behavior. LGBs, as a rule, hit long if they don't guide. Paveway IIs less so than Paveway IIIs, the latter need pretty much continuous lasing to get them to target, because they glide a lot. ArmA doesn't really get this right, at least on the F-16 there's only one way to drop LGBs without lasing them, and that's by using a ballistics table and the backup reticle. IRL, LGBs can be dropped, self-lased, from over 4.2km (for an F-16, the limit is 14kft). I don't know when exactly does the bomb see the laser, but another aircraft's TGP should be able to see it flying at around that altitude and several miles out.
  12. dragon01

    AI command tier.

    Even better, save that one for ArmA4. This is too fundamental a change to make it to A3 at this point.
  13. RHS has fuel tanks, and I think they're working. I don't know if there's scripting involved, though.
  14. I'll be happy even if just the ships come out. 🙂 They look like something that would be docked at Tanoa's ports, for instance. Make the place look a bit less deserted. I can see getting a lot of mileage out of them.
  15. dragon01

    3CB Factions

    While we're at it, early Soviet forces also seem to be missing the Mi-24D. They seem to be the Afghan-period Soviets, so I would have thought they'd have it. There's a Mi-24D in RHS.
  16. dragon01

    3CB Factions

    The relevant parts usually aren't. Generally, RHS Dev seems to add things rather than remove them. I didn't mean "ArmA-side" dependency, but rather "Workshop-side", just to allow dev users to use this pack without too much fuss. There's no reason why it wouldn't work and as per the post below, it does. I'll see if that works, but I'll have to find a way of preventing it from downloading release in first place. As I said, I need to watch my HD space.
  17. dragon01

    3CB Factions

    Would that be possible to make a version of this mod dependent on RHS dev versions, as opposed to release packs? I'd love to try this pack, but I'm a bit pressed for HD space, and I already use development versions of RHS, but Steam Workshop won't allow to me to download this mod without also downloading the release versions.
  18. I love those ships. I hope that placement will be left up to the mission designer, or is it planned to have them in ports by default?
  19. dragon01

    ZEPHIK Female Characters

    Maybe @zeealex could help with that? If there's anyone who knows her way around ArmA3 heads, it's her. 🙂
  20. Lighting is medicore, but I think animations break immersion a lot more. I'd classify the most serious problems with lighting as bugs (flares, for example). Although this is another area where it really shows that the game is built on a pimped-out OFP engine.
  21. The animations are probably ArmA's biggest weakness that is not an actual bug. The engine, it would seem, simply can't do a decent job at it. Hopefully the next installment will fix that.
  22. dragon01

    ZEPHIK Female Characters

    Congrats on release. 🙂 We really need a full mod like this in ArmA, after all this years.
  23. Given that ArmA3 is, by this point, practically a zombie itself, I would say this is perfectly appropriate. 🙂
  24. dragon01

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    I can see the USAF Tucano being a GREF-dependent addition, sort of like BRDMs for the Russians. This isn't anything new to RHS.
  25. dragon01

    [WIP] ZEPHIK Female Characters

    Really nice work. I'm glad to see one of those mods finally get this far. One of these days I'm going to write an ArmA campaign, and I'd really love to have female characters in there. 🙂 If it helps, the only female radio protocol in existence is the US English one from ArmA1, so you can probably skip CSAT and other non-English speaking forces. In fact, NATO cammies are probably a better choice than CTRG now that I think of it, seeing as the latter are British.
×