UkropyPrivyet

Looking really good so far. I've got a few questions: When you say "Varan", do you mean Varan-ZSU? Varan isn't in use with the Ukrainian Armed Forces, but the UAF does use Varan-ZSU, which is a much, much different camouflage. Will you also be making the Ukrainian Airborne's new helmet? I can't remember the name, but it recently passed trials. It looks a lot like an OpsCore FAST combined with one of those older MICH communications helmets. One last thing: Aren't FORT Tavors in 5.45? I've seen a bunch of pictures of them in the field and they definitely aren't 5.56 based on the shape of the magazine alone. Maybe my eyes are tricking me, but I'm pretty sure Ukrainian Tavors are 5.45, not 5.56. Are you going to be making some of P1G-Tac's other camouflages (such as Jaba?) or just MM-14 and Varan? Really looking forward to this.

The AK-12 is the more proper of the two, but in reality both are wrong because both weapons should have the front end of the receiver as well as the bolt carrier group heat up. Hell, even the handguard heats up after enough rounds.

They also don't mesh well with the older helmets and often cut through the chinstraps at multiple points. Jesus, the skin sections don't even line up below the padded portion of the pants.

I have no problem with the Special Forces setting of the campaign like many might, but to me the three major problems of the campaign are: length, scale, and depth. The campaign is abysmally short when you compare it to the main game or even to Bohemia's past DLCs, the scale of the campaign is tiny, with combat rarely going beyond your squad to include four or five more soldiers from the 2nd CTRG team in the area, and the depth of the campaign is basically non-existent. The problem is that, even in multiplayer, you feel like the sole asset on the island even when you know for a fact that there's another CTRG team 300m away from you at all times. Sure, they talk to you on the radio, but other than that they don't really do anything until a "major part" of the campaign comes up. At least one person other than me has said that Tanoa doesn't feel like a battlefield, and I wholly agree with that. Tanoa just so happens to be the environment, but there's never any action outside of where you are. You're not a soldier in a larger fight, you are the fight. Nothing happens unless you're there to make it happen. Most of all, I just wanted a campaign that would further the story, and I really didn't even get that. The campaign to me seems like the devs got tired of writing anything for the CSAT forces so they decided to end it with "CSAT BASICALLY BTFO FOREVER, AMERICAN DONGS CONFIRMED FOR LARGE" with a big old cliffhanger on the Eastwind device. No major skirmishes with CSAT (again? really?) and a typical "bad guy, here's why" faction to fight with the thin string that "CSAT IS BEHIND EVERYTHING" in something reminiscent of the ramblings of a conspiracy theorist.

Please, for the love of Christ, fix this Bohemia: This is one of the main optics in the game for CTRG (guess the canon of it being a CSAT optic is done then?) and, just like RCO and ERCO, it has massive fucking finger print smudging (how'd that get on there through those thick ass gloves?) that makes it impossible to use in these new jungle conditions. Please, nobody ever touches the glass on their optic. This shit is disgusting and doesn't add any "realistic" or "lived in" value to the optic, it just makes these scopes useless. Almost every time I spawned I found myself switching to iron sights because they haven't been fat fingered by a particularly greasy neckbeard. Nobody wants this It's intentional and realistic.

Judging by what hasn't been fixed I doubt they've made it off the first three pages of feedback, let alone onto page 12 or 13. I'm sure they'll get a good laugh out of it eventually. Yeah, extremely fast and not very realistic. Part of it is definitely the fact that the guy rips the magazine out of the magwell without rocking it out, which takes a long motion out of the reload and therefore shortens it a good bit. Needs to be corrected and slowed down. Do you mean Probad? I could be wrong, but I doubt that's anything more than a photoshop, which sucks because he really improved the aesthetic of the SPAR-16 tenfold with his improvements.

I'm really not. Since you need a refresher: You're saying the HK416 and HK417 have sporadic, unrealistically high recoil. I'm telling you that I don't believe they do, and you're telling me that I'm thick headed because I'm asking you to provide proof from the game's coding rather than just spitting out opinions and claiming to be offended. You're also claiming that the AK-12 is more accurate in game, which is "unacceptable" because you believe that the HK416 in game is this super highly customized SF weapon that's got a fancy Geissele trigger, a match-grade barrel, and all sorts of other bullshit that simply isn't true. Your argument is also that the HK416 is used by da Special Forces, therefore it's got to be above-average in quality, rather than being another simply-MilSpec rifle. You're also piling on top of this that an old AKS-74 showcases signs of flexing under stress (like all weapons do, including the HK416) and acting like that's a sign that the AK-12 should be less accurate (something you've even stated might not be the case with the new double coated barrels). You're piggybacking on top of this that the AK-12's got better sights (an opinion) and that the HK416's sights suck (an opinion) and therefore should be changed (an opinion). You're getting angry and accusatory because you've not got any facts to back up any of your opinions, and when I've called you out you're instead asking me to back up my points and expecting me to accept your anecdotal evidence. That's the entire argument summed up. You're doing a fine job proving everything I've posted up until this point. Grow up and bring something to the table and I'll be more than willing to talk about this, but if you want to keep up with the "I m so smaert n u r dum i do not need 2 takl 2 yoo" crap, then good riddance. I'd like a debate on this and I don't think it should be private. If he wants to argue, I'm not going to. If he wants to debate, then I'm more than willing to have at him with facts. However, he doesn't want facts, he wants people to confirm his opinions.

Just because you feel personally attacked doesn't mean you are. I don't care how you feel about the subject, all you're doing is bringing up "muh feelings" and "how I see it" rather than "here's how it actually works using values and all that good shit". I'm not going to bring them in because that's not how the burden of proof works. I never said the HK417 has super high recoil and that the HK416 has inconsistent recoil, so therefore I'm not going to go digging to prove that point. You want anyone to listen to you and take you seriously? Do that yourself. The iron sights are a preference thing. I personally prefer the SPAR's closed irons to the AK's open irons just because they're better for actually hitting your target even if they suck for acquiring your target. They shouldn't be changed and made less realistic simply because people don't like them, because guess what: KAC 300m sights like that suck in the real world to use until you get used to them. They're meant for accurate shooting at longer distances, not quick shots at short range. Cool, you posted two videos that show an old, outdated AR variant and an old, outdated AK74 variant. AKs have barrel whip, but so do ARs. Here's a video by the slow mo guys using a SBR, full auto AR-15 and you can see every little bit of the gun moving and bending in different directions. Does it flex as bad as the AK? Probably not, but that's not really got anything to do with anything. AKs flexing has no real affect on the accuracy because if it did you'd see greater accuracy out of milled AK variants, and that really doesn't happen. Neither gun looks like rubber or like it's going to snap, they just look like pieces of metal trying to contain an explosion. Make up whatever backstory you want in your head to justify the SPAR-16 being this super awesome rifle that's totally not a factory standard milspec weapon, but it's nothing more than your imagination. Weapons are made and put together in factories for soldiers, even SF soldiers. Do they occasionally modify their own weapons? Yeah, but that's not a widescale thing. Block IIs and HK416s don't come standard with Geissele triggers, or match grade barrels, or any of that shit. The SPAR in the game has HK everything, from the stock to the barrel to the trigger. Simple as that. Stop with the made up crap. Extra weight in the front stops muzzle rise, but the piston system forces the weapon back into the shoulder which means that muzzle flip is lower but recoil is higher. Simple as that. The HK416 was never considered the best AR variant in the world by anyone who knows about them, but instead only by people who think they know. SFs aren't all-knowing braniacs; many of them still run around with desert night vision camouflage swearing to it regardless of the fact that it's the worst night vision camouflage in the world. The rifle isn't extremely high quality. I've shot one, I know people who own them, and I've disassembled them and looked at all their awesome internal problems. Say what you want, but all you've done is complain, make shit up, and provide absolutely no evidence beyond anecdotal tripe to this thread. The MXM should be better than the SPAR-17. It's a more modern rifle with a more modern cartridge. It's not secret that 7.62x51mm and 5.56x45mm are long outdated even today (for instance, the powder technology that we could be using blows the current shit out of the water), not to mention by 2035. SFs use weapons that suit the mission, not the best weapons. What this mission is? I don't know. The reality of the situation, in my opinion, is that BIS is incredibly unimaginative when it comes to weapon designs. They've tried their best, but they're going back to the standard weapons of today because they just can't get it right. These weapons will be worse, won't be balanced, and so on and so forth, but they're going to be different, which is all that matters to me. Once again, anecdotal evidence. Don't care. You can sit here and cry all you want about people being mean to you, but do you really expect me to respect you, acknowledge you, or any of that other crap when you're going to sit here and call me thick-skulled and tell me to piss off? Don't demand respect and act like a child, because that's how you get treated like a child. This conversation has been respectful regardless of how you view it; it's you who introduced name calling and insulting because you dislike that people were insinuating that you didn't know what you claim to know while providing contradictory points. I agree. This is an issue that should be fixed and it really reminds me of CoD MW2 back when they used 20 round magazines that magically held 30 rounds and had nothing inside of them (hey, like the Katiba!!) Would like to see this issue fixed ASAP. Don't really care about shotguns anymore, but I would like to see the XM25 back in the ggame.

It's too bad you don't have you way, because that looks a shitload better. Yes, just yes. The AK12 has more recoil than the HK416 no matter what in game, so I don't have any clue what you're talking about there. The HK416 does have a higher fire rate though, which does contribute to a higher recoil overall than most 5.56 guns. The SPAR-16 is just the HK416, which isn't really high quality or built for "Tier-1" operators. It's extremely front heavy, has more recoil than most ARs due to its piston design, and has nothing really positive going for it. The AKM and AK-12 most certainly do NOT have more recoil than the HK416. Have you tried playing the latest build? I'm not sure if they changed it, but it's perfectly acceptable as it is right now. HK416 seems fine to me, but the only issue I could possibly think of is that the AK-12 might outperform the HK416 in ballistics, which is an issue with the devs having a hard on for the non-existent stopping power of the 7.62x39mm round. It's more accurate? Since when? It's got less recoil? Since when? Is 5.56 not one-shot without body armor? If not, then they've fucked up a system they've previously fixed. You think the AK-12 and AKMs sights are better than the HK416? Are you trolling, or are you literally backwards right now? Slow motion? How about actually looking into the recoil values rather than "muh video footage"? Try using something set in stone rather than just making baseless claims. Seems consistently straight up with a minor pull to the right to me. Dude, all guns bend when they fire. Have you ever fired a gun? I've got an AR, an AKM, an AK74, a VZ58, 3 Mosin Nagants, A 10/22, and countless other guns and they all flex when they fire to some degree or another. It's a controlled explosion, so shit moves in all directions. The MX beats the SPAR-16? Well isn't that a shocker? The 6.5mm round was designed to replace the 5.56 round, which explains why 5.56 is much worse. The only problem is that it seems the devs don't want to continue on this trend of everyone using 6.5, or maybe they just want to have SFs be different for the sake of being different. Either way, 6.5 is going to be better, and it should be. The SPAR-17 shouldn't be up and down because pistons change the way weapons recoil and in what direction they pull. A DI/Stoner gas rifle would be straight up and down, but a piston sure won't be. Very few guns in this game have straight up and down recoil, which is good because recoil is very rarely up and down. This recoil pattern you're complaining about? It doesn't exist. You're being extremely melodramatic, and I suggest you stop. It's not a misdirection, it's basically what you're saying. Are you not complaining that a twelve pound 7.62x51mm rifle has more recoil on full auto than a 25-30lbs 9.3 GPMG? That's a pretty stupid comparison, if I do say so myself. The GPMG is going to have less recoil, but it'll be harder to keep on target simply because you're holding it out rather than resting it on something. That being said, ArmA doesn't exactly account for that, and I somehow doubt many people would like it to. The SPAR-17 really doesn't have improper recoil at all. Why do you keep assuming that high quality rifles have low recoil? Even if the HK416 and HK417 were above average quality rifles, then what would make them have lower recoil? Seems like a stupid assumption to me. Does the SR-25 magically have no recoil because it's a $5000 rifle? The CMR-76 is in 6.5. I've built several AR-15s and AR-10s, and I somehow doubt that you do if you seriously believe any of what you're saying. This problem exists nowhere.

It's really not all that close to the shoulder, like, at all. Excuse me? I've never heard that before in my life, in fact, I've heard that everyone always uses the collapsed position as it's easiest to shoot properly with the M4 (nose to charging handle) as well as makes it easier to get eye relief with the ACOG without having to stretch your neck. It's pretty common to see soldiers shooting their ARs with the stock fully collapsed, as well, thus further disproving that. As for the last sentence: that's preferential crap. I'm 6'4" and I can tell you right now that it's not uncomfortable in the slightest to shoot with the stock on my AR fully collapsed. Is it more comfortable than, say, 2 positions out? No, but it's closer to comfort than discomfort. As for wearing thick body armor: welcome to the military. ESAPI plates are thick regardless of the carrier it's in, which is why you see people using fully collapsed stocks. ACOGs have poor eye relief and you've really got to scrunch up on that rifle. Please don't do this. The AFG on the MX is incredibly ugly and way too large. It would be much better to just move the hand out onto the rail. As for normal soldiers having the AFG: I wish they wouldn't. They're really, really awkward for the majority of people and aren't even being utilized properly in game. Them being there strikes me as just being easier than properly messing around with models so as not to create a funky model. I like it, but that's a real shame. Wish that BIS would just get rid of that terrible suppressor model than continue to adapt it it new rifles. Thanks for the visualization. This makes it plain to see that a. it's not that close and b. the HK416's positioning is just messed up. Love your three ideas, but you should add one more: fold the pistol grip on the grenade launcher. RHS mod has it unfolded as well, and I really don't understand why. That'd do nothing other than get in the way. Seems to me like everything you said makes sense in reality. The HK417 has more recoil in semi-automatic and fully automatic than the AK-12. The HK416 has a higher fire rate than the AK-12 and therefore has more recoil when shooting in full auto. I don't really see what you're getting at.

Don't get me wrong: the change is worth it, but it still would've been nicer to see them rework the stance rather than lengthen the stock. I want the see the stock touch the shoulder, but I would've liked to see it in the most compact position so that the rife's as short as possible. Does it matter that much? Not really, but you know, to me it does a little more than it should.

Last time I checked those things weren't even common when Germany used the G3 as it's standard issue rifle. That being said, the HK417 is specifically a DMR in every military in which it's employed, even the one in ArmA. This means that nobody's going to be putting an underslung GL on it in any situation. I wish they would've just changed the holding animation rather than extending the stock, but oh well. You think the ERCO looks passable? I think that's one of the optics where it's most noticeable. It's just blatantly obvious with all magnified optics that the mounting position is wayyy too far forward.

Huh, before you pointed that out I didn't actually realize how low the chest rig sits, which is funny because I own one in real life and know just about where it should be sitting. Totally agree now that I've taken the time to look at it: needs to be higher up. Also, I laughed at kit mong's bergin. Never heard that one before, but I like it.

Oh wow, that is uh.... that is terrifying. BIS please stop dicking around and just realize that 5.45x39mm is a superior cartridge and that the original model was perfectly fine.

I'm personally very displeased about the fact that you're still commenting after we've established that you're doing nothing but putting down legitimate criticism. How about you either find something to give feedback over (hell, it can even be something positive) or you just leave? Unfortunately polarization always has to start with a manchild like him somewhere. I've been a critic of the game since day one but there are also a lot of things I really enjoy about the game. Just because I dislike certain features (really, really dislike) doesn't mean I can't really, really love other features of the game. I can simultaneously praise and criticize a game, but people don't seem to realize this. We will never learn that there's a middle ground because "we" assumes a collective conscious that's reasonable. "We" as individuals likely all recognize there's a middle ground, but "we" don't recognize that everyone else recognizes this, which means we all default to picking a side and running with it. You're not wasting your time and I believe in your statement 100%, but I doubt it will change anything. So you're confirming that you were acting like a horse's ass on purpose? Better yet, now you're leaving? Great, glad to hear it. The real issue isn't that there's a single uniform or plate carrier, it's just that their models and textures are so old that they're remarkably poor when compared to all of the newer gear. We've seen what they have the ability to make and we want more of it, especially when they're about to debut a new map and new camo, so it's rather sane to assume they'll redo the old uniforms so that they look as good as everything else that's new, but instead what we've gotten so far is just retextures of the old gear. I've got no problem with retextures so long as they're retexturing something high quality. At this point, however, the models for NATO clothing and vests are bordering on, what, 5 or 6 years old? They pre-date the current development team leader of ArmA III and were debuted in something like 2011. The vests don't even match what the players wear in terms of camo or the magazines they use in terms of weapons, and it's just visually grating. I agree with the retexture jobs being rather bland as well. I love the new Multicam Tropic and think it's a beautiful texture, but much like the MX rifles it's just way too clean and unissued. It looks like something that's been in a hermetically sealed chamber, which is so wrong when juxtaposed to photos of the USMC in the Pacific during WWII where their clothes were torn or rotting off (not saying I even want them this level of damaged, though). They would/will be great when they fix some of the wonky colors and maybe rub some dirt on 'em, but that'll just be a nice texture over an outdated model.