pils
-
Content Count
199 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Everything posted by pils
-
All that is not really relevant. Relevant are real life parameters. The typical range for tank engagements depends very much on the terrain. As said, engagement ranges were commonly beyond 3000m during Desert Storm (which is why the coalition forces destroyed several thousands of Iraqi tanks and vehicles while losing hardly any units to enemy tank fire). Abrams tanks have recorded kill shots beyond 4000m. The longest range confirmed kill of the war was achieved by a Challenger 1, destroying an Iraqi tank at 4700m distance. And that was in 1991. (Rumors claim, state of the art tanks like the Leopard 2A7+ (with its new L55 main gun), Armata or K2 Black Panther are supposed to have effective ranges of up to 5000 - 6000m. And it's 2017. Arma 3 takes place in 2035.) Btw.: I'm playing with 6500 - 8000m view distance (depending on number of active AI; view distance: general + objects!) on Liberation CTI servers with 30 - 40 fps. My system is anything but fancy: i5-4670K + GTX 760.
-
Guys, why is the FCS of tanks limited to 3000m?? Even the 1995 introduced Leopard 2A5 with its gunner main optical system EMES 15 can measure ranges of up to 9999m with an accuracy of +/- 10m, whereas ranges up to 4000m are processed by the FCS directly. At distances >4000m, the gunner can manually enter the value and the FCS will then process the data - as said, up to 9999m. And that's technology introduced in 1995, Arma 3 is supposed to take place 40 years later. 3000m ultimative FCS processing limit, that's what ... 1980s technology? Even in the Gulf War in 1990/1991 Abrams and Challengers were accurately engaging and destroying Iraqi tanks and vehicles at ranges beyond 3000m on a regular basis! Please, increase the capabilities of the FCS in Arma 3.
-
I'm currently researching and gathering real life data from actual manufacturer factsheets and whatnot, because I'm planning to submit the issue properly to the issue tracker, but I'm lacking free time and I'm not done yet. (Since I've brought this issue up in this thread for at least 2 times without any success.) But I'm pretty sure even without that data, you Dear Devs, and most players will realize that the current values and the gameplay as a result are inconsistent and anything but authentic. The issue is I'm talking about is the lack of penetration power of certain medium to large caliber multi purpose/general purpose/high explosive shells against structures and objects. In the name of the Holy Lord, please adjust these values for the 1.72 release. If not, me and a significant number of frustrated customers will have to play their favorite game at least another month or so with messed up ballistics - resulting in messed up gameplay and authenticity. 120 - 125 mm HE needs to be able to penetrate at least one reinforced concrete wall or any other wall/object equivalent to that. 40 mm GPR needs to be able to penetrate at least one reinforced concrete wall or any other wall/object equivalent to that. (I know, it has no delayed detonation fuse, but according to the ammunition manufacturer this round is able to penetrate 210 mm of double reinforced concrete and neutralize hostiles behind that wall / hiding in that room. Similar to the 30 mm MP shell. Yes, even without delayed detonation fuse, I'm going to prove it by providing the manufacturer's datasheet!) Consider implementing the same for any kind of HEAT shell/warhead --> HEAT principle! --> penetrate a hard matter of significant thickness and shower everyone behind with molten metal or even shrapnel (HEAT tandem warhead principle!). Use the projectile tracking scenario (link) and fire a 120 mm HE shell at e.g. a pathetically weak piece of wood pressboard (even a 9 mm pistol round will penetrate): The 20 kg heavy 120 mm HE shell with a muzzle velocity of 1100 m/s and a delayed detonation fuse will be stopped immediately! By a piece of wooden pressboard! Guys, that's BS! We're at version 1.70, not 0.90. Please, I'm, begging you! (I'm sorry for trying to point out this issue with the large font size, it won't happen again, promised!)
-
I'm currently downloading the dev branch ... please tell me the Praetorian C (Phalanx CIWS) is now able to intercept projectiles! Please, just please! I know it wasn't able a few weeks ago when I briefly tried the new stuff out. Devs please. the main purpose of that weapon system is to intercept projectiles. I'm pretty sure you guys know it was designed to intercept anti-ship-missiles (at least the slower, older ones), any kind of ATGM, any kind of artillery shell or artillery rocket, mortars, bombs (at least if they are being dropped in a few kilometers distance so the system has enough time to react). There is even quite a chance it might be able to intercept fast missiles like the Kh-25MP ( ), at least one at a time, probably not two in a salvo. But anyway, at least the ATGMs, bombs, artillery and mortar interception is a must have feature. It would be an amazing addition to the game ... and without it, the static carrier is pretty much doomed right away.
-
Nah, it's missing those little thingies the Su-35 has at the outer end of the wing.
-
Oh god, these are so annoying. On top comes the fact that the AI gets stuck at them in so many cases, as well as they get stuck at other indestructible objects that would get flattened by a heavy vehicle with ease in real life. So, these remaining indestructible objects not only affect you directly, but also indirectly by getting your AI stuck. I think maybe if I have some free time, I'm going to make a list and post it in the issue tracker.
-
Ineed, we should have such a feature. Even e.g. the CV90 which entered service in 1993 already had such a feature. CV90 with programmable ammuntion for the 40mm autocannon But hey, Arma 3 was released more than 3 years ago and they just updated to version 1.68 ... and we still have such major inconsistencies and lack very basic features like penetration values for a whole range of calibers. I still need to fire into windows and hope I'm lucky enough to hit the infantry inside the building with my tank, just like I was forced to do 3 years ago ... Man, I fucking love Arma, I've been playing since Operation Flashpoint. I remember very well how I played Operation Flashpoint with my buddies during LAN parties lol, but it was awesome! But then there are frustrating issues like this one and they just don't get fixed I have plenty of pistols I never use, countless of different small arms of which maybe 3 are relevant for me and I have a super fancy diving feature nobody is using at all anyway ... and at the same time I can't even fire through a shitty little wood panel with a tank gun HE shell that weighs 19 kg and has a velocity of about 1000 m/s. Or 70 ton tanks getting stuck at old washing machines laying around, football goals, basketball hoop poles, (some) little telegraph poles and other annoying, indestructible objects.
-
True that. Sadly the Drozd is pretty much an obsolete system and far less effective than the modern systems like Trophy. So for "balancing reasons" (oh boy), the T-100 probably should get something similar to the Arena APS. However, I'm not sure if the devs will ever implement those systems. It would make killing tanks with ATGMs or RPGs extremely difficult - at least if they implement the system with realistic parameters. (Sorry for double post)
-
Sorry, I guess I should have added an explanation. You misinterpret my remark due to the lack of additional info. I'm talking about penetration values of these shells not against vehicles, but penetration values considering objects, structures, etc. The most unsettling part is, they have absolutely fine values for for 35mm AA guns, 30mm HE (all of them, jets, Kajman and all vehicles with 30mm cannon), 20mm HE (Blackfoot and Buzzard) - but it seems then they simply forgot to keep on and alter the values for the larger caliber guns, too. This is the 3rd time I'm pointing this issue out. This annoying inconsistency is present now for months already. Try it yourself, preferably by using the scenario "Quick and Fun Projectile Tracing" (Steam workshop). Now spawn e.g. a BTR and fire with 30mm HE at a building or that row of wooden panels. The shell will penetrate most common walls and detonate inside the building, which is great and of course absolutely realistic. Modern ammunition can be programmed to either detonate on impact, or with a programmable delay time after impact. (Additionally most ammunition types have an airburst mode at a programmable distance, but hey, I'm not even asking for something that fancy.) Fire at the row of wood panels. The 30mm HE actually penetrates numerous of them. Again, it's great to have these features for these calibers. Especially since initially no HE shell could penetrate anything - not even bushes - for a long, long time. But the feature is still missing for the larger calibers. Try firing at the wood panels with the 40mm HE of the Marshall or with any tank HE/HEAT shell. All of those will get stopped immediately by the first shitty wood panel. They simply forgot to add penetration values for the larger calibers - and that is the situation for months now! I need to fire tank HE shells into windows to get rid of infantry hiding inside --- because the devs keep forgetting they need to add penetration values for these calibers, too! *hint* *hint* Regarding the HE/HEAT issue: I think e.g. a 120mm HE shell should be able to penetrate several light walls. If you try that scenario I suggested, you will see that the 30mm HE fired from vehicle autocannons already has pretty powerful penetration abilities and can penetrate one strong wall or a few light walls. So consequently, 40mm - 125mm HE need to get even higher penetration values. However since we all know about the concept of HEAT shells, they should get a penetration value that lets them penetrate one strong wall and explode inside the building. Not 100% realistic, but that's as close as we can get to real life with the engine I think. Because yea, a HEAT shell would hit the wall on the outside, the HEAT mechanism would get triggered, with the jet penetrating the wall and showering the room behind that wall with molten metal. So it should be possible to fire "through" one wall with HEAT shells, but not more. Edit: Oh, just noticed the new version was released. Next major update, still not fixed. If any of the devs happen to read this and there is going to be a hotfix for something during the next days/weeks - you have the chance to make a huge Arma fan very, very happy. Just get them big caliber HE shells the penetration values they deserve. That's all I'm asking for ;)
-
Yea, but only if we also get actually working active protection systems for the tanks ;P Merkava 4 with Trophy Leopard 2A7 with APS/ADS
-
Just tested the dev build. Runs really nice and smooth. However it's a pity that large caliber HE shells still have no penetration value. Come on guys, that's basic stuff. Don't neglect the basics while working on fancy new features. Please devs, add penetration values for 40mm - 125mm HE shells. Also consider adding penetration values for HEAT shells - which should be lower than for HE I'd say. _______________________________________________ Issues I've noticed regarding the new features: - I've added GBUs to all pods, which worked fine. But it would release several GBUs per single click (3 or even 4). - No matter how many Plamen 20mm pods you add, only 2 will fire at the same time. (Which actually makes sense, who would add more than 2 of them? Maybe you could just restrict it being added to max. 2 pylons.) Addition: - Please let us also configure the loadout of the cannons, especially in case of helicopters! It would be cool if you could easily exchange the 20mm of the Blackfoot with the mysterious 25mm GAU-12 that exists in the game files ;) And in case of e.g. the Kajman, it would be really cool if you could select the amount of 30mm HE and AP ammunition respectively the ratio!
-
I know it's all a lot of work and you might have other priorities on what you like to get done first, but this here would be my wish list of features for the future: - all weapon systems should be fully stabilized - both the Phalanx and the ESSM should be trying to intercept incoming anti-ship-missiles - the Phalanx furthermore should try to intercept additionally ATGMs, laser guided bombs, mortars and artillery shells - the Phalanx should have a higher rate of fire and come with extra magazines - that take some time to reload though - the Phalanx should also engage helicopters, jets as well as non-armored ground targets in range - but the priority should be intercepting incoming projectiles - the large caliber ship guns should have the ability to be used for indirect fire - per artillery computer [if the AI can't handle both, it would be cool if at least a player could switch to artillery computer and use the guns as artillery] Current issues I've noticed: - the Phalanx can't be rotated at times, and the AI isn't reliably engaging targets (same issue with the patrol boat gunners) - AI using the cannons have trouble aiming, especially at closer ranges (e.g. firing at infantry close to the shore) - some of the weapon specifications seem to be not accurate at the moment: The La Fayette's 100mm gun has a rate of fire of 78 (!) rounds per minute in real life The Oto melara 127/64 Lightweight cannon has a rate of fire of 40 rounds per minute in real life
-
Sounds great, I wouldn't change anything! Those environment sounds .. man, those take the cake! Looking forward to the distant helo sounds, exactly what I was missing at times. Are you planning to get something similar for fixed wing aircrafts, too? I have one additional suggestion/wish: Imho the Kuma/Leopard 2 engine sounds were the best ... I think back in JSRS 4 (some time before Apex)? Back then you had a really authentic and realistic sound. It sounded just like the real thing, with that turbo whistle and everything. The sound now is nice, too, but imho not as great as back in (I think) JSRS 4. You had it sounding just like that: Leopard 2 engine sound If it was for me, I'd prefer the engine sound effects you had back then. Just because of that realism factor. Of course that's just me ;)
-
Afaik there were some changes to the audio of the game in 1.66 which interfere with the mod. So there isn't much we can do atm except waiting for an update of the mod ;)
-
They released both on the Steam workshop recently, so I thought I give them a try. (Steam workshop is just too convenient ..) I have to admit I have tested them only a few minutes, but imho - no comparison to your work at all. Not saying this to badmouth them, hell no. It's great to see people trying to improve my favorite game, especially the audio - where it lacks the most. And they surely haven't invested as much time as you. Just a few things I noticed which made me decide they aren't my cup of tea for now: Still many vanilla sounds, nearby bullet impacts barely audible, large caliber impacts and big explosions (partly?) not audible at just 1000m distance, etc. I really don't know much about the technical stuff in the background, so they might be ahead in that category? I have no idea. (still seems to lack a lot if you can't even hear serious stuff going on just 1000m away) But when it comes to the sound effects themselves, there is no comparison. Your mod is worlds ahead in that aspect.
-
Man, I downloaded the 64 bit version the other day, all the 5.8 GBs. After 3 CTD within just 5 minutes I changed back to 1.66, lol. And I wasn't using any mods. It seems they still have a lot of work to do and the 64 bit version is anything but stable itself. So I wouldn't worry too much ..
-
The circle of fog is pretty much caused by low view distance settings by you or the server as I understand. Turn up your view distance and it should be better. I dislike playing with a view distance less than 4000m. It feels like you sit in a bulb with fog all around you. (E.g. the popular EUTW servers force limit you to like 2400m, which really sucks.) 4000m or more view distance looks so much more realistic. I love the fact that I can now play with view distances of 5000m and more without problems due to optimization. Usually 4000m was the limit for me in multiplayer. In terms of performance and optimization Arma 3 really has improved a lot.
-
I digged around the web some more and managed to find a small PDF publicized by the manufacturer who provides the 120 mm HE-MP-T rounds for the Merkava 4 [Slammer]. Sadly, it's by far not as detailed as the PDF of the German manufacturer, but it states the most important points: Destroys bunkers, urban structures and LAVs, and highly lethal against dismounted Infantry High hit probability at all combat ranges Penetrates 200mm double reinforced concrete wall Programmable, multifunctional fuze with 3 modes of operation: Delayed Impact, Super Quick, Air Burst So the round is able to penetrate a 200 mm double reinforced concrete wall before detonating inside the structure. And that's exactly where Arma 3 needs is still lacking. For no reason, since the 30 mm HE is already able to do exactly this. So please, add penetration values for the large caliber HE shells, too! Source: 120 mm HE-MP-T ammunition PDF
-
Devs, please. One patch just to crush the bugs, and so many major issues haven't been fixed: 40 mm HE: Needs penetration values to be able to at least penetrate one reinforced concrete wall (just as you did with the 30 mm HE) 120 mm / 125 mm HE: New effect is very well done, but we need penetration values to be able to penetrate at least one reinforced concrete wall with these shells! Additionally, these shells should be effective at destroying fortifications like bunkers and sandbag structures (*) 105 mm / 125 mm HEAT: Not as urgently needed, but these shells should also be capable of penetrating objects or at least deal damage to targets behind objects. I mean, that's the whole purpose of HEAT ammuntion, right? APFSDS of all calibers: There needs to be a small area of splash damage at each point of impact (or penetration) to simulate the shrapnel blast caused by the impact. Area of splash damage should increase with increasing cailber, of course (**) (*) Manufacturer presentation of 120 mm HE shell This very interesting PDF released by (one of?) the manufacturers of 120 mm HE shells for the L/44 and L/55 120 mm Rheimmetall smoothbore cannon (L/55 cannon is being used in the latest Leopard 2 [Kuma]). The Merkava 4 [Slammer] uses a copy of the L/44, which can even use the exact same ammunition as the real L/44. The presentation makes it very, very clear. Why can't we have that in Arma 3? It's absolutely possible to with only minor changes (maybe except the airburst option). (**) Here two of the very few examples I managed to find: 120 mm APFSDS impacting Note the considerable amount of shrapnel caused by the violent impacts! Syrian rebel tank gets hit by SAA tank. Volume warning. Warning, graphic content! The Syrian rebel tank was supposedly hit either by a Soviet "3BM-44" or a Soviet "3BM-23" shell fired from a SAA T-72, which are both APFSDS shells. Several rebel fighters in the vicinity are being injured by shrapnel, which demonstrates that of course impacts of the penetrator rods of APFSDS shells will cause a considerable amount of shrapnel blast if impacting into solid hard objects. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Indestructible objects: Not even talking about Tanoa, but even good old Altis is still full of objects that will stop a 70 ton tank going 60 kph. E.g. many different kinds of poles and posts. Sometimes poles that look exactly the same but are at different locations vary. Some can be flattened easily, some are indestrucible. Addionally: Soccer goals, basketball loops, random crap like those old washing machines - all those objects will stop a tank. And oh boy. the AI loves to get stuck at that shit. Please, fix that. Extremely tough or entirely indestructible structures: Many structures - like the "white hangar" - are extremely tough. Even though they are just made out of metal sheets only a few mm thick, they resist numerous mortar rounds, tank shells, several 30 mm Gatling strafe runs ... Other structures like the small and the big office are still completely indestructible, which is just wrong. In addition: The front armor of the Kuma is still really weak. 9 out of 10 times the first hit to the front from a T-100 will force me out of the Kuma. Even the T-100 seems to have a tougher front armor now, 5 out of 10 times a T-100 stays operational after my first hit to the front with the Kuma's cannon (hits on ERA, I guess). ERA is great against HEAT projectiles, but not _that_ great against modern DU long-rods. Imho.
-
Arleigh Burke - DDG-105 USS Dewey (WIP)
pils replied to norsk2277's topic in ARMA 3 - ADDONS & MODS: DISCUSSION
HELL YEAH!!! I WAS WAITING FOR A PROPER MODERN WARSHIP SINCE THE RELEASE! Holy shit, this looks extremely promising, I can't wait to play with it. If you guys get the CIWS to intercept missiles, that would be absolutely fucking awesome! That would make also a C-RAM mod possible, if you guys get this to work! Sidenote: Besides the missiles fired by planes and helos, please don't forget about the Titan ATGM as well as mortar rounds, artillery shells, artillery missiles [MLRS] and even RPGs [unless it's being fired from a very close distance]. The current real life fire control system of the Phalanx CIWS is very well able to identify all these types of missiles and projectiles and enables the gun to intercept all those threats reliably. So if you guys could implement such a complete CIWS feature, now that would be amazing. The Phalanx today is also equipped with powerful VIS/IR optics and can be used manually against surface targets, like small attack boats. It would also be really cool to have the real life rate of fire of the Phalanx [4500 rounds per minute], or at least as close as you can get it to the real life rate of fire ;) The models so far look great, well done guys! -
Hmm nice, can't wait for the update :) I'd like to add some feedback, but this is really just my very personal opinion. Plus, this of course refers to the currently published version and might very well be already obsolete since you already reworked a lot of these things as you said. But I'd still like to give some feedback to the current version: - I know a lot of people were bitching about the very loud sonic cracks back in "Dragonfyre", maybe even earlier. I loved them, every time someone shot at you, you were actually a little bit startled if playing with some a bit above average volume. If it was for me, you could turn the volume of the sonic cracks just a little bit up again. - I feel like gunfire and explosions should be the loudest sounds, then nearby jets, then helos, then vehicles, etc. Right now, I feel like a nearby hovering helo is about as loud as you firing your gun. Nearby jets sound rather quiet to me at the moment as well as vehicles - especially heavy vehicles - compared to helos. Imho you could consider turning up the gunfire/explosions/cannon, etc. sounds as well as jets and vehicles a little, while turning down the helos a bit. However - your sounds of the helos themselves are amazing. Helos sound simply awesome. It's just that I feel the volume may be a bit too high compared to vehicle sounds as well as very loud noises like gunfire, explosions, etc., as said. I'd also love to be able to hear both jets and helos from a greater distance - I'd also love to be able to hear a firefight from even a little bit further than currently. I think small arms fire is currently audible from up to 900 - 1000m away? I wouldn't mind being able to hear it even at a bit longer distances. But of course I understand there are certain limitations, plus it needs to be balanced with other noises that are audible even further.
-
I doubt the RPT spam is the main cause, but it might add to it. I'm sure someone will be able to tell you where to put the dummy files to fix it. Usually sudden drops in FPS occur in my experience when simply too many AIs are active at the same time.
-
God, I simply love the regular updates. It just keeps getting better and better. Looking forward to spend a lot of time playing Arma 3 Apex + JSRS in my semester break ;) edit: Yes damnit, I will leave the basement from time to time, alright?! :D
- 1214 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- lordjarhead
- eden
- (and 3 more)
-
God, it's so much fun to play with your mod. The sound is fucking amazing. After quite some time playing with vanilla sounds while you were taking a break, 1.2 already was so fucking great. What a massive difference to the lame vanilla sounds! One of the most impressive situations for me playing with JSRS Dragonfyre Eden 1.2 for the first time was when I was advancing towards a hostile town about 200 m ahead with a small friendly force and a friendly IFV on a hilltop about 800 m behind us was covering our advance. When the first 30mm rounds flew right over our heads, I was ducking in real life, lmao. The super sonic bullet cracks for large caliber projectiles are just so great. But then, even more amazing was when I realized: First you hear the projectiles passing over you at super sonic speed, a moment later you hear them impacting somewhere in the town in front of you - and finally you hear the actual IFV cannon firing somewhere in a distance behind you. I was just like: Holy shit, that's the real deal. That's exactly how the sound of a game like Arma 3 should be like. Edit: Oh btw, anyone else having issues with the engine sounds of the Kuma? I already had the issue in 1.3, even after redownloading and reinstalling all files. And still have the issue in 1.4. The Kuma seems to have the vanilla engine sounds for me. Anyone else with that issue or is it just me?
-
Sorry for my completely random and trivial insertion, but just when you asked if someone wants to add something, this aspect came to my mind (just a minor feedback for some potential later version, no urgent bug or something): Both the jet and helicopter sounds are just so damn nice - I wish I could hear them from a bit further away, especially the jets. To stay with jets, both the sound of flying a jet and the sound of a jet passing by at close to medium distanced are perfect imho. But I'm missing one thing, and that is this very characteristic grumble a jet manouvering at low altitudes causes. This dull, muffled grumble you can sometimes hear from miles away and that keeps getting louder as the jet closes in. I'd love to have that in Arma. (Would also be useful as early warning, but of course needs to be scaled down to suit the game, I'm aware of that ^^)
- 1214 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- lordjarhead
- eden
- (and 3 more)