CaptainAzimuth

I hope it's Naval assets. Jet and Tank DLC's are cool, meaning we have everything from Helicopters, Infantry, Planes, Tanks, Dirt Grinders, and... well, a rubber duck. Not many threats on the water, and all those detailed ports. I would absolutely love for this to be a Naval DLC, as there's a handful of things and new tech they could use with it.

Well, it depends on the Naval assets. If we're talking infantry and cavalry, chances are they didn't know that the future of combat in island locations and Archipelago's would include Naval assets, even small ones or simple things like Transport for logistics, vehicle and infantry, as well as attack boats, meaning access denial of Maritime assets of the opposing force as well as difficult to track fast moving waterborne AA/AT, and Mortar systems. =/

A little late to party. Though, i guess it doesn't matter, considering that anything regarding Naval assets isn't mentioned. I guess i'm a little salty, but who doesn't like a Jet DLC eh? And Tank DLC? I'm an optimistic kind of guy, so i'm going to say that, if there's not a couple of heavy attack boats in the Tank or Orange DLC, then GG. I've given up completely on something to fill the gap in combat on the water, especially with 3 Vanilla maps all with a heck lot of it, Tanoa with the most strategic water ways, and detailed ports as well.

It's quite an ambitious game. But i like where it's going. didn't know anything about it until after NMS dropped, and shattered... Lol, but SC looks like something i'd get into, as it's got the same feel as Arma, in the sense that yeah, it's got it's own universe with it's own special niche market. It's big, not in the sense that everyone plays it, but in the sense that it's got so much potential, and possible content. The whole Space ships inside other bigger space ships that can fly places, and the ability to move around in big space ships while on the move, and deploying smaller vehicles from space ships on planets, and how smooth it operates, is super attractive. This brings many possibilities into a game with a Multiplayer environment. But i'm mainly interested in the potential. Looks really promising, seeing as many of there features work, really freakin well.

Well, maybe not like, major code and things like that. Something more along the lines of this.

It would be maybe cool if BI did like a little episode or mini series with in depth looks at Engine work. Maybe this could serve as some form of informational insight. Though to be fair i wasn't saying BI couldn't develop their Engine. I was saying that BI would need a substantially larger team to amplify that effort, which would bring a more robust engine and possibly title sooner than we have now.

Not alot when not all 100 employees specialize in Engine coding and such. Some are designers of different areas (graphic, art, concept, etc.), while others maybe specialize in web, or logistical tasks throughout the company. That's like saying 500 athletes can build a Gym. But each athlete specializes in their own area...

Yeah, that' a shame. Maybe someone will rip it, or perhaps VICE will eventually make it global. Then again, i suspect intentions why it's US specific, likely to protect the lives of those who went to other regions to gain information, and that sensitive information along with the ID and lives of the journalists are likely at risk if the warring groups find out. That or it's just text book censorship. I suspect the former though, VICE makes well with their intentions and transparency.

I don't think they need to buy a new engine. BI just need to be loaned and given enough resources to unlock their dream project's true potential. I think BI know what they want from their Engine, they've learned from Operation Flashpoint, to Arma 1, 2, TKOH, Arma 3, TKOM, and now DayZ. Their most successful titles are big, sandboxes with massive potential. IF they had the man power, and resources to overhaul their Engine to where they dream it should be, i can only assume it might be just as good as the ones running BF1, or Star Citizen, or GTAV, but in Bohemia's own special way.

All these new games are having more interesting available water assets, War Thunder, BF1, even JC3 had interesting options for Naval combat on a manageable scale. Arma 3 kinda slipped on that, while i feel they could have added Naval Assets before it was cool to do so. But i'm ok with them finishing Apex marginally on time. I still hope for Naval assets that fill the role of up armed combat in the channels. Doesn't have to be big ships, just well thought armored and armed fighting and transport boats. I've even put up a decent example list in the wishlist thread not too long ago. Would be cool if the boats were a little bigger than those, but the idea is to make it interesting, and Arma 3 specific. Ability to have a boat capable of fighting shoreline Armor and transport a few vehicles for each team, and maybe something for the actual Tanoan forces, who only got a truck reskin... Really fails to compliment the ports and docks around the island that could make interesting for various missions centered around strategic water access points.

Yeah, maybe it's being denied in your region. I clicked the link and accessed it easily. Try this one?

odd... apparently looking at comments on the video, you're right. There might actually be zone restrictions. I wonder why they'd do that, i don't see a purpose for it. Well anyhow, if you don't eventually gain access to the footage, a way to put it, is VICE goes to Yemen to gain extremely important information from Al-Nursra/Al-Qaeda. The end result is a extremely chilling view from one of it's senior members on how it came to be, and how it's far more powerful today than it was after 9/11, directly related to a series of events carried out by the United States. In short, it's been highlighted by Jordan's King most recently, something along the lines of, "US thinks it knows the Middle East/North Africa better than they know themselves", and is such the reason it's losing the war on Jihad, and only spreading it more. It's fighting it alone with it's own Agenda/Narrative, and leaving out the countries people who are effected the most by these wars, who then see no other alternative but to join the Jihad. Now, knowing this, throw in the larger proxy wars in the mix, Russia, Iran, and increasingly getting involved, China. It's quite obvious that this situation will literally take an absolute miracle to be turned around, and that's just the Terrorism part. It won't end. It will grow and spread, and it's already been spreading. Now, add in the US elections, Clinton/Trump, both of which are incapable of decent policies even at home, and you have this delicate mess? It becomes more frightening. After all, Clinton, is the one who help cultivate their part on Libya, which is now another massive breeding ground for this same Jihad to spread further, and it's influence to grow. Her in office would only make it worse with her personal grudge against Russia. Trump, well... don't get me started.

I dream of an Arma as detailed and intuitive a Star Citizen with the action of Planetside 2/Battleground Europe. In reality though... Arma's future engine will likely still be just a few improvements over it's relative engine. I don't think we really need VR yet, because the Engine itself still needs a variety of improvements to bring it up to a level where full large scale sandbox experiences can be had. This includes things like the view distance limit needs to die, and be redone. Interaction menu... cough, TKOH interaction still better, Cough. I like the idea that wildlife could be a thing in the new Engine, ex. Wolves/Bears, imagine Arma 4, modern day Vietnam, fighting the CSAT PLA, but you have to infiltrate through jungle which have tigers. Could very well be a possibility. Although, it's comforting to see BI have fixed the Shadows protruding through objects, nearly. About time that feature made it.

#RoadToTheRoadmap

Well, if this isn't the right timing, i don't know what is. Watch all 44 minutes and 6 seconds of it. Understand the history, and how things are today. You can realize how connected all this is to what's going on right now in Syria and elsewhere. It'll be a serous wake up call.

They need to stop. The US has done enough, and it's time to change it's foreign policies. We've seen it in Afghanistan, Sudan, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria can consider themselves lucky, or maybe not. But honestly, the US had its chance to do the right thing, to work with the Russians, and still in fact have an option. Russia is open to working with the US in solving this terror problem, and as the King of Jordan put it best, if they don't change their way of thinking and taking on this terror threat, it will only spread and keep out pacing western efforts... But i think they already know. Terrorism can only be defeated if the countries effected are all coordinated in tackling it. For the most part, at least that i can see, there's no real effort for US in doing that. They've instead, as you've said, backed rebels fighting the Government at the same time Daesh had the same ambitions, and the group mixed, creating a quagmire, and the groups can't be separated now. I still believe, unfortunately, the only option remaining, is for the US to suck it up, join efforts with Russia, and solve this issue once and for all, and use that to forge closer relations. This would of course mean Assad gaining power, but i'm sure that eventually, perhaps after the mess is said and done the regime can be tried in the international court. But to be honest, it's better than a full blown war, and it's better than prolonging the war. It will also mean FSA will perish, but it's at this point, the only thing that can be done. Millions of Syrians are refugee's, so stabilizing the country so they can return is extremely important. I don't know what to think anymore. Washington and the D.O.D. have official lost their minds. But i doubt this is some accident, and i doubt that they simply didn't know it would come to this. I think they know, but the people of the US don't, which is the biggest issue, as they'll support the military response. The people don't know anything about what's going on. It's almost depressing. I've also heard Russia is conducting drills that include sheltering 40 million people. This isn't some flash back to the Cold War... This is 2016...

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/syria-white-house-warns-actions-if-russia-won-t-negotiate-n659126 Madness? Would the US really consider fighting Russia over their failed Policies in the Middle East? Do they really hold their Ego that high? When weighing in the results, if the US were to have won today, Syriia would be over run with Deash influence in 100% of the country seeing as they've pretty much integrated themselves into the moderate forces by now, as John Kerry himself simply acknowledged he couldn't separate the Extremists from the Moderates. With Russia winning today, it would mean that Syria Regime regaining complete control of the country while most of the internal affairs being negotiated between Assad, Russia and their circles, most likely with the US completely out of the question. But seeing as the US has cut diplomatic channels with Russia now, this has gone from another war of words suddenly into the real deal. But why? Because the the end of a cease fire? You know, these people actually had an option to keep the Cease Fire deal as long as they could. They could have worked with Russia to solve the situation together, and improve relations that could have carried over to Europe, and improved counter terror operations. What blows my mind is how much emphasis on Human Rights is taking place, as the sole reason for the US to be considering intervening and attacking Russia. If Human Rights were the actual motivation, i think they would have, and could have taken different steps to ensure the UN convoy and Cease Fire didn't completely self destruct. But instead of searching for solutions, they simply began blasting Russia as the suspect, with not much evidence to back it up. So now they've started contemplating more extreme options? Quote: "If Aleppo were to fall, it would put the lives of tens of thousands of additional Syrian civilians at risk, in a war that has already killed more than 400,000 and spawned a massive refugee crisis. Obama might be able to save the city for the rebels if he ordered U.S. air strikes against Assad's forces, but those would carry a significant risk of escalation with Russia, which backs the Assad regime and is bombing rebel positions." And for those of you who don't understand what this means, Russia has recently deployed advanced defense systems in the region. But weeks before this, Moscow said that if Syrian troops are attacked again, there would be direct, and extreme response. So in translation, this literally means war with Russia in the short term. Is it really worth it?

Last i recall, it's very possible that Russia was involved. Possible because i distinctly remember Russia forcing certain people who happened to be on, near the border, inside Ukrainian border to stop posting on social media. Such included soldiers who were taking selfies, and blogging about how they're with a certain Artillery unit, and providing support. The controversy was that their posts were tracked by GPS, and as such, pin-pointed their locations inside or on the border with Ukraine. This does to some extent show that weather or not they're Russians, they aren't well trained. This could also prove that the rebels having ranted about downing a jet, which would be something a group of trigger happy rebels would want to to, given they've no where else to talk about their achievement that they could have deemed "epic" before they realized it was a civil airline. At the end of the day, these rebels need to be held accountable, and investigated. Same with the people responsible for failing to notify the Malaysian Airline it was entering a contested zone during conflict. This could be seen as part of the war crime, and Ukraine should be investigated for that neglect. At this point, no one is innocent, honestly. So i fail to see how fingers are only being pointed from one group to another. The lack of accountability being ascertained from the UN, and the International Community, is quite frustrating.

There are games that do such a thing, but RV4, or Enfusion, are not on that list. As for a new Modern Engine... I think BI should spend the time rebuilding with what they have on Enfusion, but keeping the best parts, like that we have in A3. I think it would take more time building from scratch, rather than robustly improving their newest achievements.

So in conclusion, no one truly knows, despite the investigation, there has been conflicting evidence from both sides, but they do know a BUK was for sure involved. Honestly, with this evidence, i think both Ukraine and the rebels should be held accountable, everyone involved really. If it's impossible to find out who committed the war crime, i think it's safe to play the "punish them all" card. If no one wants to speak the truth, and the information war is too deep, the only way to solve the issue is to make everyone accountable. Otherwise it will simply end up remaining a war of words from all sides, and ultimately lead to nothing, with 298 people lost without reason.

Any plans for a more realistic paint scheme? For example, a low profile paint like the ones the F-22's have, based on the idea the F-35's probably wouldn't have that much color in the emblems and marking due to the stealth nature of the radar absorbent paint? In other words a more discrete theme?

Hmmm, good points, that's a possible thought. I also thought about that when i realized Ukraine possessed the same/similar Buk Systems. There's always the possibility of a Member state of an organization like NATO abusing it's status to invoke intervention in it's favor. It's something i thought about, one of NATO's biggest flaws when it comes to constantly adding nations into it's block... The biggest threat to Europe, Russia, and even NATO itself, honestly.

perhaps slight exaggerated, but not a baseless concern. I mean, not that i'm concerned of the migration, i'm excited to see more progress with Enfusion, but idk... Arma 3 has calmed really. Not a lot going on, which is ok, but it's pretty much the same old, even with VTOL's and SLV's added, i've noticed rarely anyone uses the VVT transport versions in their servers oddly enough. Gunships are straight forward, pretty much like faster Attack Helo's, it's cool but not new in terms of gameplay. I'm loving the new updates to things like Eden though, i've noticed the massive increase in detailed set ups in certain game modes with the environment looking more detailed with items and immersion. But i can just feel that with only bug fixes on BI's Agenda, it's quite clear they're likely to move over to the DayZ team soon as that's pretty much their future. Though yeah, i'm interested in seeing the final Road Map, but i expect to see not much than what we already know being on it. No new surprises or announcements, but recaps, and a pivot of focus to their future engine, maybe a few details of planned features Pre-APEX that didn't make it, and why, things like that.

But you should given that's simply the history behind it. It's no longer something people can deny. You look at the past, and it's quite easy to see the Future. Here we are, with Russia and the US directly arguing over their proxies, because they both know. It's not even a Syrian Civil War anymore. It's two super powers fighting a war with another countries people, with regional support like the nations you mentioned on the side lines.

Would have imagined this one to be obvious to begin with, even without an investigation. It was Ukraine who were using jets during the beginning of the conflict... so at what point would the Ukrainians needs Air Defense against a non-existent air threat?