sirscorpion

First off, thank you to the RHS guys if not for this mod I would have zero interest in ARMA3 "or 2". I have but one Request/question: It seems that all weapon systems have insane accuracy, Be it the AI or the weapon system them selves. In other words the grouping of weapons at range is extremely tight with very little deviation even at insane ranges, This is mainly with Auto canons and machine guns can put a >3m grouping at 2km-3km with full auto fire regardless of platform, target or moving speed. My question is, will we ever get some sort of realistic "spread" for ballistics "player and AI" ? and why can IFV snipe a full speed Jet while on the move "AI" PS: RPG29 plz

Any chance we see the Air burst rounds?

Looks and feels amazing, great work and look forward to the SMAW. Really needed as there is a lack in good authentic AT weapons. Just a bug report note, at the moment it has a wight of 2kg, i think the real thing is around 8.5kg, also removing it and putting it on the ground and picking it up gives you a new round. Edit: the HEDP seem to be under preforming as well even vs T-55 "front shot slightly damaged the gun", no damage to the RHS tanks at all. HEAT rounds seem to work fine. Otherwise seems to work great.

This indeed does sound very interesting. Honestly i did not play Arma 3 till you guys made this mod, simply amazing work. Question, The ATGM at the moment feel lack luster in sound animation and behavior, any plans on updating that? and will we see an expanded RPG arsenal "RPG29,SMAW, maybe some portable ATGM mets and so on? Thank you for this amazing mod makes me hope for more like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeLwrbPT1Io

@NoRailGunner its simple, player made missions are not standard, and are "NOT" included in the scope of this discussion. @Celery just a comment and some questions on this discussion, i always see this throw back "balance depends on the mission maker" while this is true on player generated content, that is not the PVP "standard/official" of the developer made game. Is there or will there be a supported "official PvP" game mode? the obvious answer is yes, however as many stated in the community "BIS will make the game and we will fix it as always" is quite a statement for a developer to get, most of the people advocating "it does not need to be the same to be balanced" are Also not taking the official game into account but taking what they see on an almost individual base what their sandbox or toybox is and using it as a base of experience. will we all adore Arma to be our own personal playground, there is a Huge impact of it being a commercial Item, a game in essence, at most its now fragments with half mods, half balance, half bugs etc. the ONE experience BIS needs to take from DayZ is that a standard game play mod with a well thought out mechanic will sell it self, and there for a system like that is Imperative to achieve, the thing that upsets me the most is that such a system is Not hard or expensive to implement. 3 Things needed by BIS, and you will have a deep, balanced and great Experience in PVP un-matched by any game out there. 1. a Standard game Mode "Warfare" a good one not the half baked vanillah one. that's the standard, the official game mode, where people measure to when entering any PVP discussion. the more complex the better, DayZ offers a presistant Mod that saves over days, Warfare will benefit Hugely from that. one unified mod with clear scope goals and objectives, to provide a set of parameters of showcasing what ARMA is about "example combat planing on "you select combat scale" logistic planing, combined operations etc etc" 2. a Standard quality and control document for addons,scripts,effects and process to be added to that standard official PVP mod: yes we like our addons, we like to have 3 thousand type of tanks and guns, and we love the mod makers, and they add soo much to this game , and provide almost all the tools for balance, problem is compatibility, quality and balance of those items them selves. think about a process that sets a list of items which will expand on the official game mode without fragmentation it, adding the to the balance and the toy box without having to side with one mod maker or the other, all you needed is a QC document and system, mod makers can chose to be in it, its an optional tool that people who make mods missions maps will aspire to, the add on assets will be shared, therefor a weapon Script for example can be shared by the modders who chose to be in that pool. just think of the huge benefit this will add, and with BIS at the helm the politics and Egos and Epeen swinging that foils this place will be significantly reduced. and oh god depth and simulations this will add so much to that, at a good price as well. 3.Stats Tracking, this prevents noob stomps, and shows clans and clan tags, insuring you know who you play with an ELO system works, simple and easy to make, not achievements and those Arcade tools, just a simple website. Also DayZ did it. why on earth is such a system not done yet? this is clearly the best step forward for this series. a Player made map like Flaujah, that has a proper balanced and paced battle that been raging for days with clans coming in and out, combined operations, Special operations behind enemy lines, large infantry combat over strategic locations, your progress means something, fighting over with an escalating tech tree of player / Dev made assets, balanced by price and research. yeah that sounds good ill pay extra for that, sad thing is its just 2 steps away and no one is going for it

Men of War assault squad did this and it has a developer of 1' date=' establishing a system like FOR a standard game is not hard. a Clan ELO and your done. no one wants that, i am just pointing out what you find an aspect that applies to MIlsim to be standard might not be in other games and vice vuersa. no game or Sim be it a Arma, DCS or 50Mil full lvl D simulator can do every thing.

@ Myke Its funny that the point a criticized is exactly what you come back as a counter argument. let me clarify it for you and with all intended respect. the people who compare "what arma is" to other games ARE the Arma community most of the time, such arrogance, and fandom from the Leaders and moderators when it comes to questions about MP always result with the same 3 arguments (this is a Mil sim, war is not fair, My team is better than yours, Its the mission makers fault) now stepping back, just for a second taking it as a person who enjoys Arma since OPF; i take 3 points out of this which if i solve i can Greatly enhance the game, make it popular with Mplay instead of what has now become a fragmented toy box. 1. a Standard MP game, warfare comes close, this is a great system and Idea for casual and hardcore, covers a wide range of possible interactions and using almost every thing the game can offer in a single serving. a standard game mode increase the game popularity, but it needs to be balanced, and by balanced i mean in the most "milsim" way possible, a proper Mil-Sim or "Realistic" game will take more options into account, taking the example of one of the posters here about the Tiger tank which had "120mm" not 180mm armor as a perfect example, is the tiger Fair? yes, 100%, it was a a bad tank on a strategic level, it was slow, prone to huge amount of breake down, a logistical nightmare, costs the same amount as 2 panther tanks, and almost 10 T34 tanks, not only that it was soo complex and used huge amount of time ending up in the production of 1350 tanks Only! while T34 was over 70k added to that another 70k Sherman tanks and about 4k IS heavy tanks. MY point is what you think is not Fair is a matter of fact Fair. T72 and BMP are crap and death traps, yes we all know that however non of those where used in proper doctrine, the USSR tank Divisions estimated the life expectancy of a Spear Head t72 attack into Europe will be around 11min, they knew that, but it was acceptable in the larger picture b/c they can build 5 to 1 NATO advanced tank. balance does not mean symmetrical you need to take EATCH and every eliminate and "simulate" it in game, How much you want to do that depends on how much "Fidelity" i Do not however argue of high fidelity as that will cost a bit, however a whatever is needed to balance the game from a fidelity point of view needes to be integrated into the "Standard MP" which BIS wants the game to run. 2. Make it more Milsim, by both the Devs and the mod makers, how? a standardization document by the Devs to what are the "wish list of tools", how they should act, and what level of realism should be standard. 3.If both the above are taken into consideration and standard MP game is adopted then a Team/Clan stats system tracking must be in place, and not for what it is used now to unlock fluff, but to help teams find fair teams to battle instead of noob stomping people out of the game. i played a lot of games which where balanced and not symmetrical, Men of War "*Assault squad" is a great example, a facing factions are so different, yet the games are brutality balanced, with a little smart thinking that can be achieved, lots of mods and other game mods, but there is a Standard game mod which you play competitively. and Myke, what happens if i shoot a house with a grenade launcher or tank in Arma? does it lose HP? i saw a vid of a dude shooting a house with a tank and it didn't make a hole in it?! "see what i did there" take it easy and cheers o7

well that's cute guys, the response from this community and how it was worded is dreadful to say the least, same thing i saw on the BF3 forms and COD before hand. let me break this to you, Arma is a bit away from being a Mil Sim, Il2 is a SIM, DCS is a Sim, cliffs of Dover is a sim. seriously this whole i r mil sim gobktocod is whats draging this down. ACE brings it closer, but about ten tons of items are missing in terms of "Mil sim" in "Il2" my plane has wight, my gun can be shot off, a million things can go wrong, in DCS my helicopter as complex engine management, proper and correct weapon systems firing procedure. Arma has group hit points, right click lock kill weapon systems, infinity range IR scopes. and in vanila u can have a solder with 3 thousand machine gun rounds and an AT for good measure. Can Arma be balanced? yes, hell yes, war is balanced on a whole huge amount of variables. i play warfare and i assume the OP is using that as a starting point. and this game is probably the easiest to balance b/c of 1 important game play element and that's cost. the whole war is not balanced when it comes to pvp crap does not fly, its sad and lazy to say otherwise, and this is why its hard as hell to get a game going. that exact mentality. here a simple way to balance things, a few needed and already modded systems and lairs of complexity in weapon systems, simple right? wight? simple right? IR scopes too op? well infantry IR scope has bat like of 3-4 hrs costs about 30k USD and has an ID range of about 900m tataaaa done IR is balanced. M1A2 to op? sure it is but it can be for a cost of 4-5 T72, done balanced also if the T-72 had a proper AGM with engagement range of 4-5 km as it should be M1A2 wont be so op. a US marine will set the government back about 500k-1mil USD, a Taki around 5k (over expected service life + factoring medical, insurance training etc" the cold war was balanced in terms of tech, even without a MAD situation the numbers where balanced. the dip in "east" tech only happened in the last 20 years, but now its starting "slowly" catch up but seriously guys, using ignorance as a shield to lolwut you way around things is not proper, and if you want this to be a true milsim, and balanced it can be done.

I think the major problem in warfare, AND any military sim is Scale, what scale do you want? realistic or realism does not mean that some one has to prema die if killed and no spawn. no is the mode of How warfare mechanics work. realism also does not generally mean that an m14 wight is this much and looks this way. what most people fouces on is the micro side of it, while in the end it needs to be a good entertaining game with no frustrations. Example, in warfare = if lets say a tank costs 10 times what it is now, and AT weapon is 10%-15% of that cost, then you have some balance and realism just in that. sure u can take this much gear but if u die you will need to buy all that again, u dont have that much money so ull have to play more tactically, manage your gear properly. and so forth. we did that on our small little server had a 10v10 warfare match go for 3 days. with great great fun and balance. its how you scale all the tools and toys, to balance things out, in that you get realistic feel. other wise cough up 27mil USD and get ur self a level D simulator

heavens no, enforcing a code should not be considered, however to insure quality control it does not stop ranking and rating add-on's and modes. the CODEX should work the other way around, in establishing a an agreed benchmark to what a mod should be like for a PVP environment. reduce the ambiguity of what is arcade/realistic/and simulation. where do the lines start and where do they end. at the moment most mod or add on websites provide a vague 5 star rating system to indicate quality of the mod. however if a codex is established by some of the Major Modding groups out there "ACE for example :P" it will provide a solid base line to what, how the mod should be done. at the moment Technical compatibility Codex do exist, i see no reason for quality control measure "not enforced, but used to grade" to be implemented as well. if such approach is welcomed by the community then Codex will spontaneously insure QC of the mods with no need for hard cut off measures.

Exactly, the problem is in Arma2, and depending the mod makers "realistic is not a fixed line" there for IF you have a realistic T55 with a 90% fidelity existing with an M1A2 with 10% fidelity, then Both are fantasy (not realistic or balanced) this is a higher issue with PVP than it is with SP. having a standard to what Realistic is or at minimum a base line will give you realism and therefor balance ---------- Post added at 08:58 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:55 AM ---------- agree with you 100%, what is an acceptable scale? do all tools scale in the same amount? example if a jet needs to fly at 60% of its max speed, does that mean a rifle needs 60% of its range? imo no. but in the end this is a fundamental question we need to answer, and agree on.

TL: DR: Arma3 needs a code among Mod makers to ensure Mod compatibility in a PVP competitive environment while maintaining realism in settings. Please show your support if you like this Idea. here we go! Well not really a Bible per say, more of a CODIX for modding. I have lurked around for quite some time with a few posts here and there, used all the mods etc. but never have I seen such a thing. ARMA is not an RPG per say, But in order for it to thrive in Modern game industry, it needs to be competitive and for that to happen it needs to be Balanced. For it to be Balanced and use all of the mods there needs to be a code amongst mod makers to how a mod needs to be what rules does it apply to making a mod that is Compatible with other Mods in a PVP environment. During my time in ARMA2 I found all mods to be vastly different More so in Vehicles, Aircraft, and Explosive munitions and Armor Values. My Experience of the inner workings of Mods is limited but I will try to explain as best of my understanding. Here is my proposal, I warn you this borders on the complex side with some analysis from game design point of view, and please correct me if such a thing does exist: The ARMA MOD BALANCE CODE (CODEX,BIBLE) Template, this is to be filled out and edited based on the dissection and mod user preferences: To make it simple, and as I looked and used Gigabytes of modes a person can classify the mods into 3 Major Category’s. The Vanilla: Modes Marked with “CODEX Vâ€: are modes that are similar to the Base game, OR provide No significant balance changes “non regulation skins for example†such items need to adhere with whats in the game and be fair and balanced in comparison to whats in the Vanilla game. Using game explosive power for example as a benchmark, or Speed of jets. A Vanilla jet will be as fast as the one in game, comparative load-out and destructive power. Armor will have the same Values etc. The Fantasy Modes: Modes marked with “CODEX Fâ€: unlimited creativity here, you know the mods I am talking about, Zombies, Flying Mech robots, etc. The Simulation Mods: Modes Marked with “CODEX Sâ€: this one is a Big one. And the toughest one to call, every one has a point of View, to what is realistic and what is Balanced we can split this into sub categories at the expense of the games compatibility in PVP environments. I believe that Real battlefield is balanced, (with limited Details, Every weapon system has a counter there is no Omni weapon, all are venerable in a modern combat environment in a symmetrical warfare setting, Asymmetrical warfare on the other hand is balanced through political and Geopolitical factors†So Breaking down what makes a weapon system: 1.Canon: the setting/environment/world of where all of the “CODEX Simulation†or “CS†fits in, Example ACE mod has a canon which is different from from Vanilla. By that it means that resting a weapon makes as much logic as using sand bags, or using a crew serviced weapon or using ACE advanced artillery tools. ACE Canon also means that weapons have complex firing process, example is AT weapons Shoulder>Safe>Aim>Calibrate> Clear Back-blast>Fire. That same complex process then needs to be applied to all weapon systems, a 6 step process means that we have a high fidelity weapon systems in the “CS†world. So in turn an AH64D should Have no less than “X†steps for an engagement. Example an AH64D with “CS†canon = Aim>Master Arm>Lase target> Box> Clear with pilot> fire. There for a Canon Base Line needs to be established, what I felt from ACE and other realism mods is there is a balance between Full fidelity, and Arcade, the number I come around with is around 60% of the engagement process is Simulated. But this is my point of view. 2. Scale: the scale of realism from a technical point of view of which the CS Item will behave in comparison to its Real life counterpart. 100% Means that an M1A2 Tanks is 1:1 scale, armor, wight, gun munition looks, sound, wight, internal working, fuel consumption, Mean time between Breakdown,service effect on performance etc, 100% cant be achieved even on level D military grade 20-30 million simulators with full access to source code and classified OEM data “around 96% is best you can get†So what is the scale that we have now in something Like ACE or the really pro mods out there is around 35-40% of the real thing. “in comparison “DCS A10†has 50-65% fidelity†The scaling system Parameters are: 10% Physical Appearance: looks, details, skins, camouflage patterns, interiors, Interaction with Hatches , switches, equipment, screens and associated sounds. 10% Base Physical Performance: Armor values Equivalent to RAH, compartmental or subsystem venerability, speed,acceleration,deceleration, wight, Interaction with environment “tank hit tree, tree crushâ€, suspension, heat signature, sounds. 10% weapons and systems: associated weapons systems “Automated/ manual range finders, thermal day/night/black/white/NV. Tracking and boxing systems. Weapons performance “range penetration, explosive radius, Ammunition types/count. Sub system Weapons “EX. coaxial gun†and all the associated user machine interface and sounds. 10% Operational process: flight model, driving model, Driver tools and process “breaks, altitude†gunner and commander processes tools, firing procedures and complexity. 10% secondary subsystems: Extra armor “ERA†Slat armor, Smoke launchers, Repair tools and interactions, Active Armor systems, IRR, RWR, IFF, ECM, Radar detectors and operation. The other 50% in simulation delve deeper into those category no need to go into them yet. This is what I can come up with and narrow down, While the canon is a subjective topic to what the world is, and I am sure that it will be dynamic and that’s fine as the canon grows it WILL show us what modes and addons become obsolete and need an upgrade. It will Also show us where do we have a imbalance hole in the canon “example an A10 flying without an SPGAA on Opfor to counter it on the proper scale†On the Scale, its more of a fixed position, we need to understand the canon to put a proper scale, what is max speed? Do tank guns fire at the full range or do we scale it to 60%? But having that will naturally equalize to a balanced battlefield, if Cost and quality is considered. This helps mission makers to use a greater verity of tools in realistic application with equal level of immersion, this also improves quality control over the mods and ad dons, better compatibility. If this generates interest I will create a Scale system which I hope others might translate into any of the mod tracking websites to act as a guide and an open source of information on what you want to make and how should it behave. I look foreword to your comments, excuse my English its not my first or 2nd language. SirScorpion

@GossamerSolid we did the test with the same version on a normal mando mission and they all worked fine, only changing item is the Mission. my conclusion is MCC breaks Mando wire guided missiles, why and how? no idea.

sure, warfare has less of an issue, missiles stile wobble a bit, but are controllable to some extent most of the time. also less people have issues with warfare. in MCC the issue is much more apparent. the missiles are ranked on severity of control loss are: Tow, "land based" Bradly A2/A3, no control for every one. just flys tracks for half a sec then some times blow up in mid air, or fly in a random direction till out of fuel. Metis almost always no control, red X control aera is limited "to track must keep around red X" but with MCC the track range is around 1 pixle. missile also spawns and flys higher than the cross-hair "u fire and have to chase the X. also u wont get more than very very limited control on the X AT5, better than the others with about 30% failure rate. M47 Dragon, works perfectly fine. Javeln works fine as well but thats box lock. all Air weapons work fine, ATGM etc, AA weapons also work fine "Stingers, igla, tunguska" yes i am thinking some missions scripts clash with some ATGMs. but why would a M47 be different from a tow? i dont know

thanks for the quick response mandoble, just did that. though mando still works on the server, Even before moving them to the top. so moved all the required lines in the init.sqf to the top. game works, mando Hud works, but wire guided missiles fly all over the place :(