silentghoust

So, I'm building a campaign to showcase the Russia 2035 mod, however I'm finding it very hard to locate any basic info on modern Russia style planning and execution of missions. One major question I have found is exactly how do Russia use their Assault Helicopters? I mean on one hand you have a CAS style aircraft capable of attacking targets, but you also have the responsibility of ferrying troops to and around the battlefield. Would they clear the AO of threats before deploying troops? Would they deploy them before hand then begin a sorta "suppression" effort as they advance? Any sources that I could follow up would be fantastic.

Is this saying realistic to real military jargon? I asked a few vets in the U.S army and they say it's possible but not with their service. Is it just something BI made up or is it specific for a branch of military? Also what does it exactly entitle? I mean the jist I get is it's objective complete, but they also seem to mention it when they simply are in position.

Greetings, I been on a quest for a hopefully simple script where the enemy AI will use its knowledge of a arty position to launch it's own. I know that the AI within a squad will magically locate any enemy arty fired at them in close proximity. I would like to exploit that behavior by simply having a script that will have any AI within a squad that is manning arty to automatically shell that position. An example would be an officer has several batteries in his squad, and when an enemy arty is spotted, the script fires off and orders the battery to fire on the target. Would it be a bit cheesy? Sure, but at least it would make players deploy arty a bit more liberally then simply spamming it tell victory.

You have to rely on the AI to do it, as there is no formal command to give. Simply drop an ammo crate of whatever you need nearby. If the AI actually needs ammo, they will go re-arm.

It's considered a private server, even if it's opened to a public. Just like if you were to open a club, but still let the general public in. Is it a short-sighted rule? Yep, but not much you can do about it.

Greetings, So I spent 2 days on this working on a little problem our mod team has. Basically, we have a unit that needs to be tough as nails, take dozen 9.3mm tough. At first, we simply upped the armor value of the unit class, but we noticed that AI didn't play well against this. As they would resort to weapons usually met for an MRAP. So our solution was to use https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Soldier_Protection. Offloading the general armor value in favor of massive damage reduction. So far everything seemed to work well except one thing...the Arms. No matter what stat, no matter what class I call. The arms simply won't reduce damage. I tried ridiculous stat increase to the point that you could blast 50.cal rounds into them, but even then, the arms still take almost 1/4 the shots as the rest of the body. We also tried alternative ideas, such as using CrewVanerable = 1 but to no luck. We also set the damage resistance low as well, but again. No luck. If anybody could help us get a working example of a fully protected arm, that would help tremendously with our project. If not that a solution that allows AI to fight a unit that has an armor value of 175.

I was kinda hoping they might merge Altis and Stratis into one map. But Can't say no to continued flushing out of the island warfare.

So based on the video we can assume that CSAT will have the T-14, but have they mentioned or announced any of the others? Also, how will these tanks fit the scope and role of each faction? For example, Jet DLC provide air-superiority fighters that complemented the existing CAS aircraft. How will these new classes of tanks complement the Slammer, T-100, Kuma, ect?

Any chance the camo net could affect visual and IR sensors?

Maybe I couldn't do it with the small testing time I had for tonight. But it seems like crew damage is still using the same model? I couldn't seem to kill any off the crew with close range AP shots, and the global "damage" effect for them seem to come into play. Is this something that will be added to the Tanks DLC or did I just not test well enough to see it?

Greetings, So to start out I basically copied and pasted the entire Y-32 VTOL config set up for the VTOL. After some tweaks it seemed to work fine, however, I seem to have one issue. At some point, with most common causes being first to move waypoint after take off, and overshooting the target. It usually happens like this AI begins to pull up Flaps set to usually 1st settings Speed gets stuck at 283 or so, no degrade or increase Aileron twitching as if wanting to turn but don't. They twitch based on direction of waypoint/objective AI will continue to simply go up till they reach the max altitude This seems to be this specific maneuver and in that state alone. Taking control and banking will break them of the state, and altitude causing lack of engine power will as well. Once even a minor outside force effects the "stall" like state. The vehicle will operate 100% normal. Although it can be triggered by overshooting a objective such as after a strafing run. Any ideas?

I basically set a drone, with a waypoint that triggers it to fire, then another waypoint to leave. I tried flyinHeight both on the drones ini, and as a waypoint activation. None seem to work

Anybody have a trick to getting the drones at a proper elevation to release the leaflets? Seems even with setheight, the drones insist at being about 100m off the ground. By then the leaflets vanish before they can hit the ground.

M1A3 is my guess as well, it honesly complements the Slammer well. As for indie, A safe guess(and sad one) would be the Challenger 2/1. It would fit the EU semi-outdated theme of the AAF. However like other suggestions, I would be much pleased if they went to an outdated tank approach, so it can be sourced out to the other GUE style groups easier.

Soviet glory never dies my friend, only the 7.65mm rounds that pen it's armor :D. It would be interesting to see a old school tank for Syndikat or FIA. Obviously it won't be it though, but who knows. I can't think of many unique EU style tanks that they could model off.

Yes, in terms of capabilities. Why the new JET DLC craft can multirole, the original collection of jets still are more suited for CAS. I'm curious what these tanks will offer in terms of fitting into each faction. NATO for example clearly needs a true MBT. AAF(assuming the 3rd is for AAF) kinda has a very nice MBT, and it's hard to see a nitch weapon system they could get with another style of tank. Unless they go oldschool t-34 but the only one can dream.

Too be honest, crew bailing on a mobility kill is just a general purpose behavior. I.E if you get hit by a tank round and have no location of the tank, would you stay in basically a none-moving deathbox knowing the next round will hit?

Yea, hoping this is the last DLC from BI they will give us maybe a tad bit more than just three tanks. Someone mentioned giving us an AT Technical for the FIA, that would be a good start. I do like the idea of at least maybe some light AT? As for speculation, my biggest question is where will these tanks fit into the overall role of each faction? obviously, NATO could use a "true" MBT but I feel the other sides are pretty buttoned up.

Yep missed that as well, I can see it being a way not to bloat the game to big. Then again, I don't really like the idea of dividing the community, of course, these policies are probably not finalized. I honestly would have to see something like Operation Arrowhead worth of content to justify me wanting to download a DLC which isolates my ability to play servers.

So after reading through the thread, and thinking about it I decided my opinion on the matter.I think that any paid Arma 3 DLC should be required to be Armaverse friendly, particularly relating to 2035. My logic is this. Balance Assuming that BI will continue its model of adding DLC content for all users, any assets created would have to be up to specs in the balance against current vanilla content. Rember this is content everybody will have, and will pay for to use. It's only justifiable it's somewhat balanced so it doesn't get isolated to nitch parts of the community. Consistency Part of the awesome of the modding community is the diversity of it. We have everything from sci-fi mods, to archery. However, it's that diversity which makes some mods very specialized. Following the same argument that BI would allow all players to interact to some extent with the assets. It would be ashamed if someone, for example, made a selection of WWI rifles, and either a community embraces them in a 2035 setting, or isolates it so people can't really use them. This would also allow talented modders to ban together with a much easier scope to focus on when it comes to producing high-quality content. Keeping 2035 lore friendly isn't that hard Think about it, BI has given us dozens of factions, entities, locals, and open stories to work with. You could create a Malden defense force that uses M1A1s. You could create a farming asset pack that ties in with civilians all around the armaverse. Syndikat could use some assets, so could FIA. The AAF could have a new special forces branch. The CDF could be turned into a 2035 faction as well, using a mix of East and West assets. Really I can't see much limits.

Just did some further testing. When they refer to the commander, they refer to the unit who is in charge of that squad(highest rank in the tank). So yes, you can switch to the gunner and control the same manner. Why I have gotten very good at commanding a tank with AI, I feel it was ultimately a necessary thing. The delay between commands, particularly when he is blabbing away on reports could make you miss your stop mark by 500m+. I assume or at least hope that BI will allow us to go to legacy or disable it based on mission.

Some Feedback and Suggestions Add proper voice clips for each faction. Greek, French, Chinese, Persian, ect. For future changes when we can select factions. Maybe tweak the extraction a bit? Or expand the zone? We literally had to team kill one player who wouldn't just move 10m to get into the zone. Add the abandoned base in Malden to the selection, seems such a waste of a good mission spot. Maybe dynamic out how missions are played based on area? Smallerr villages = more insurgent, outpost, ect. Cities = Headquarters, vehicle depots, airfields.

Paradropping will happen automatically when you set the player spawn point high enough. Players who use that point will spawn with a parachute.

I was kinda hoping for a Showcase mission. Kinda helps the community get a footing on what they can potentially do with the map. I think it's well designed though, and it's clear that the map designers at BI have learned a lot since the Altis days.

This was a rough test, so I didn't really look into it further. I bet they are fine with the actual map built in ones. Why I know some buildings cause this issue when custom place, I specifically wanted to point this out simply because I expect the community will want to use these heavily. I'll admit the test isn't perfect, but I felt the AI unwilling to at least attempt to get in the building was worth noting.