CaptainAzimuth

I want to see the most modern, or in development weapon for each faction, pack from BI. Since it is 2035 in the Armaverse. FN-Scar anyone?

No, you mis-read, i am saying i would like if BI could make different armaments for these vehicles. In other words, invent a KA-60 (P-30 Orca) with different armament. One with the pylon 6.5, and one with maybe a 25mm HE pod. And yes, the Buzzard has a heavy cannon pylon as well, which could be possible for BI to simply attach that to a scout heli. not sure what "mm" though.

^ nuf said. Though, i like my 25 mm cannon better. Ahaha, but maybe that would be better fitted on a larger helicopter, such as the KA-60 (P-30 Orca)

Ahaha, Arma 2 had too much content for one game? I still don't see it, but maybe that's just me. It is after all an open sandbox.

True. I think we need something better looking than the An-2. I think it's days have long passed.

Alright, the issue has been posted on Feedback, up votes needed for better looking Vanilla content. http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=15537

I am thinking, the Devs, and BIS, need to fix up, and polish what they have first, before coming out with new stuff. The campaign has nothing to do with this how ever. But for example, simple things like, models of vehicles, and a few other things. I've taken a look at the Hatchback and i didn't quite look as professional as the SUV, and that is understandable due to the SUV being Luxury, but the Hatchback model itself is not a very good one. Looks beat up, and the back top brake light its absolutely horrible. Second thing, is the L-159 Port from the Czech pack. Redone yes, but not to a good standard. The HUD isn't centered, and one thing that REALLY bothers me are the red lines above the cockpit. I've seen them in real life, and when you look at them in game, it is terribly faded and slanted off to the left top side of the cockpit glass. The Model itself also could use slight refurbishment. Most other vehicles though, are fine and look like they fit their place. But sometimes fixing up the small things can make a huge difference. Example of the red lines on the Buzzard (ALCA) - How they should look Example of the red lines on the Buzzard In Game

I love it how inproportionate the size of this APC is compared to its counterpart in A3. IFV - Panther ---------- Post added at 16:48 ---------- Previous post was at 16:45 ---------- I fully agree on that aspect. The vehicle is nice, but that doesn't give it a reason to be used for NATO forces now does it. The only factions that have appropriate hardware is Opfor and Greenfor.

I agree with that. Also though, i would still like to see few different versions of the littlebird, or maybe all scout heli's. Maybe one with a little more punch.

Well thanks, it was simply a thought. But at that, only a few of those are small transports, the first and second ones seems to be more large/medium transport. But yeah, i agree, maybe not "Large Transport" but something more compact. Simply tactical HALO operations maybe.

Yeah, but were are only looking at Limnos in the ceneter and Psara. Those are both Altis and Stratis. Making one map with them both same distance like that on map, being an Airfield installed on Stratis, that could be where the NATO air base is. Idk, just a wild idea. ---------- Post added at 21:55 ---------- Previous post was at 21:53 ---------- A full blown AWACS i don't think would be necessary. Ahaha, but maybe we could use the Carrier based Hawk AWACS/Patrol. Maybe give it a larger radar to enable real AWACS functionality?

!!!IDEA!!! - This will have to have some serious modder/dev backing though. Look at a map. If you look at Limnos (Altis), Stratis is not that far away. Why not have a map, where Altis, and Stratis co exist? I think it is possible. Do't know how many errors or issues, or bugs would come about, but someone must be mad enough to try it. What i am getting at, is place Stratis the same distance as it is away from Altis, as it is in real life. Here, a diagram.

@ProGamer Ok, good point there. Than again, Maybe is is a design off the Markava, it doesn't look "Exactly" like the Markava, but has many distinct features of it... not sure. But i see what you got there. My solution was to have Factions within NATO, without straying too too far from the dedicated mindset of the original content.

If im not mistaken, BI stated that they will be supporting A3 for 5 years. Look, they don't have to make it now, i mean there was limited content for Arma 2 as well. But in due time, i do believe all these neat and useful tech can, and more than likely sketched, modeled, tweaked, and put into the game as free DLC. ---------- Post added at 21:35 ---------- Previous post was at 21:33 ---------- That is enough time for all our hopes and dreams to be thoroughly looked over.

Why not use brand new 21st century weapons, equivalent to those in arma 2? Masada ACR, medium snipers lie the T-5000, or Sako TRG M10? Hell, we might as well, we got the good stuff like the Intervention .408 already. Lets get some more new tech. 7,62мм ÑнайперÑÐºÐ°Ñ Ð²Ð¸Ð½Ñ‚Ð¾Ð²ÐºÐ° СВ-98

LOL, the YMC... no. Not practical. As we see what happened to it when someone ended up hitting the stall button too soon.

That is interesting, i've always noticed the RPM in Arma and other games. Hold the trigger and Battlefield. Hold the trigger in Arma 2/3. Notice that the RPM kinda sputters. It isn't a straight fire rate, almost like a stream that is disrupted my something minor.

@ProGamer It does make sense for NATO to adapt the Markava. The Israeli's have designed the Markava MBT using the best features from tanks all over the world. Germans, American, Canadian, and Russian tank features. Don't remember them all. About all the other things, i have no idea.

Well, the way i see it, instead of Port things from Arma 2, i rather them make new things. New weapons. As for the whole future thing? That is cool, some people like it, some people don't. Personally, i don't like things TOO futuristic, i would play Planetside 2 otherwise. But instead of porting over old models like they did the Buzzard, they should have made a new refurbished one. Now, things like the A346, as CAS, is not possible, i don't think Italy has an attack variant, the way Russia has been developing its Yak-131 Light Attack. At you may think why put tons of weapons on a trainer and send it to battle, well, it isn't a trainer. The Yak-130 is. The Yak-131 on the other hand, will utilize the best of the Yak-130. After all, it can imitate the flight characteristics of any 4th+ gen plane, including all American ones, and all East planes as well. (in the subsonic area of course). and it is obvious, BI is not going to put a Mach 2.5 jet on Altis, much less do they know how to create the flight model of one, without hours on hours of looking into them. As for the transports, well, i am interesting to see how this will go. the Hem-T trucks and 5 person MRAP's are enough for me, I've driven a Hunter across the map and enjoyed the scenery. I enjoy having a highway in Altis unlike Chernorus where the roads were... not well placed. Thanks to Cherno-Russian construction companies. I will wait Patiently and see what BI will come up with in terms of Air transport. The heli's they have now are fine. Oh wait, and if you have time, look up the KA-62. Raussia's new heli, bigger than the KA-60 (P-30 Orca)

They have the technology to make a ton of weather effects, like having two layers of clouds, or a lower and higher cloud cover. Why they haven't implemented it in yet? Imbalances in the game probably since release. If that isn't the case, than i don't know why. But they REALLy, SERIOUSLY, need to use Truesky. If not, we must find a way to make it work, maybe create a weather addon, but it would be better to have weather features hardwired into Vanilla.

You under estimate these "trainers". I can understand your point on the C-130s. As for the trainers though, I will have you know, the ALCA (buzzard) is not the BEST, and i can understand the fact that the faction it belongs to is the Rebels, but i understand how to use it and it's power. I played Insurgency on Altis as the Greenfor pilot, even though Blufor had all of this great stuff to hoot me down with... I decimated them. They couldn't leave spawn, and every time they got themselves a jet up, i shot it down. But that is besides the point. Now on the other hand, i've seen the new CSAT CAS plane, and i know what it is. It is a good thing, but these things BI adds into the game can be very useful, if you have the right people behind them. As for transports, well... i can see what you mean. Cherno was even smaller and we had a C-130 for a 144KM map. what will be have for a 270KM map for transport. I simply hope it is something not over done. Personally, i don't like quad rotors. Not only do i see major flaws in them, but they are not practical in my opinion. (As transports anyway, Quad rotor drones are ok. i can deal with that.)

Your correct to some extent. And yes, i do agree that there would have been tons of screams if the cargo in that plane were full, but the last time i checked, flying a plane with full armament as apposed to no weapons and 30% fual in a Buzzard, didn't changed it's performance what so ever, but that is besides the point. Now as for variety, it would be nice to have a little taste of everything. Since, it would fit all factions. In other words, no fixed wing aircraft? Why no some simple beach planes, and Cessna's to enjoy a nice civilian flight? Also, i agree that boats should be a part of the action too. In a post not long ago, i brought up how the Battlefield 4 Patrol Boats played such a key role in the islands and on maps with water. Think about an armored boat, larger than the speedboat mini-gun, with a Titan launcher and a 25-30mm cannon. That would be something to see. Maybe an AA variant of it as well. But time will tell. I guarantee you all these things will come, but BI is more Slowly and surely at this point. They have their hands full, believe me when i say that.

This is my solution. Have different variants of light recon attack helis. Seeing as it is 2035, im quite surprised BI hasn't stray slightly away from older designs. The littlebrid for example had Mini-guns and rockets. Why not Retrofit the Pawnee with maybe a 25mm cannon on one side. THAT would be way more effective, and would be 10 times better than spraying some led all over the place to scare an enemy or two.

Ill look into that later as well. I remember doing a mission at night and i could see the instruments glow, but never payed that much attention to the HUD unless i was doing a landing.

The A400m and C-130J are the most logical Cargo/Transports. I cant see anything else being used, unless BI were willing to implement something like Russian's modern Caspian Sea Monster. They have the technology to make planes that can land on water so why not? But hey, the A400m is STOL, and fully capable of landing and taking off at some of the airfields on Altis. I do believe though that there is one airfield you cant get off unless you have like, an Ultra light or Prop plane. But all the other Airfields are doable with an A400M. C-130J on the other hand, will only get off the main airport. That is a fact. I've tested it out and ended up hitting tress and rock walls with a C-130J. I've seen videos of the A-400m. Matter a fact, here. Instant take off. (not really, but you get the point, it is flexible) ---------- Post added at 17:27 ---------- Previous post was at 17:19 ---------- You contradicted yourself. You want variety of vehicles, yet you get all bent out of shape because people request one single Cargo plane? So wait, the definition of variety doesn't include different kinds of aircraft does it... hmm...