Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'anti-tank'.
Found 2 results
mickeymen posted a topic in ARMA 3 - DLCHi to all! How can I assume, the Tanks DLC will have to add not only new tanks, but also new anti-tank weapons and I would like to talk about it. Today (v1.76) in Arma3, very few anti-tank weapons for the infantryman. Before, I was inspired by the topic by @SuicideKing in which he suggests expand the AT - infantry weapon. I fully support him on this issue, but he did not mention the new AT-weapons for FIA/Syndicate factions. The FIA and Syndicate has very little military potential before enemy armor. Yes they can use AT's infantry weapon from other factions, but I would very much like them to have a unique anti-tank weapon based on Offroad! They have for this purpose all the prerequisites. I would like to see Anti-Tank Offroads, for example which we can see in the trailer of the game Squad Before, I saw such weapons in the middle east and this is suitable for the FIA or Syndicare factions. As seems to me, It will be unique vehicles, which can diversify the gameplay of Arma3, because it will be very mobile and powerful to use, while remaining weak in the area of armor. Since this will not require much work (We already have Offroads for which it only remains to add AT weapons) with the least cost to the developers, these AT-vehicles could be an excellent addition to the Tanks DLC. Who likes this idea, please support me.
SuicideKing posted a topic in ARMA 3 - DEVELOPMENT BRANCH[I wasn't sure if i should put this here or in the general A3 topic, decided to put it here as it pertained to Tanks DLC. Apologies if this is the wrong place.] The infantry-vehicle balance in Arma 3 has been very-all-or-nothing since the start. The situation improved slightly with Apex and the introduction of the RPG7 and open turret LSVs, however the situation remains undesirable. Let us walk through the issue in steps. On the vehicle side, the problem is: CROWS turrets mean that MRAPs, IFVs, APCs all need to be dealt with an AT rocket, as crew can't be shot out of the turret. Vehicles can drive by at high speed, and still locate and shoot players accurately An AI vehicle can very accurately locate the person who fired even a single bullet at it, making attempts of disabling CROWS turrets by shooting at them very dangerous. Given all these factors, it's only really viable to use LSVs and off roads and not expect people to die random arbitrary deaths. Of course, the AAF is missing such a vehicle. i.e. to quote a fellow community member, "I think Humvees, M113s, and Vodniks are more critical right now than carl gustavs [for the infantry game]". With Tanks DLC the expectation on the vehicle side is mostly limited to introduction of new tanks (and hopefully a more readable damage/armour model), so of course open turret M113s, BRDMs and vodniks seem out of the question. That brings me to the infantry side of the equation. On the infantry side, the way in which we traditionally have run our Platoons is with: a R(AT) being Light AT(LAT) integral to each infantry squad, expected to take care of everything up to and including wheeled IFVs/APCs at close to medium range. For tracked IFVs (and in emergencies, tanks) or for multiple IFV class vehicles, we have a dedicated Medium AT (MAT) team. To handle tanks, we use a Heavy AT (HAT) team. To quote another community member, in Arma 2 the setup went like this: Now the situation is really weird: RPG7 is the only Light AT asset available. Thematically doesn't fit NATO and CTRG, and I'd expect the AAF and CSAT to at least use more types of rounds (especially CSAT, if the argument were to be made that AAF has NATO stuff). PCML is on the heavier side of LAT, but has a medium range fire and forget system. It makes a dedicated Medium AT semi redundant if given to Rifleman (AT) units. While at times desirable, this limits the ability for us mission makers to provide NATO/CTRG/AAF with something lighter for use within fire teams. Regular infantry get a weapon with 500m range and fairly reliable accuracy and thus the only distinction between LAT and MAT becomes the amount of ammo carried about. The PCML thematically feels strange being a weapon system with a fancy fire and forget, yet having less punch than the RPG42. RPG-42 is a pretty powerful round and qualifies as MAT. One could argue that being a dumbfire projectile balances it out (and thus can be given to R(AT) units), however this brings two issues. First, it can take out a tracked IFV/APC in a couple of shots out to 500m, which fills the MAT role pretty well. The second issue is the same as with the PCML - the difference between LAT and MAT boils down to ammo count. Titan AT lies squarely in the HAT category. So in effect, for NATO/CSAT/AAF/CTRG there are only two kinds of AT depending on your categorization: LAT and HAT, or MAT and HAT. FIA and Syndikat manage to avoid this issue by having RPG7s for LAT and RPG42 for MAT. One could suggest that RPG7s be used for CSAT LAT too, but then we're at the point where FIA, CSAT and Syndikat have the same AT weapons, which can be thematically jarring. So what are the solutions to this? Well it's tricky without suggesting production of new assets but: The easy way: Introduce more variants of warheads. RPG7/RPG42/PCML could all use things like tandem warhead rounds, etc. The harder way: Introduce the AT4 and increase the lethality of the PCML (or at least, introduce a heavier round to avoid breaking the campaign ;) ). This lets us give LAT to AAF/NATO, while giving MAT a stronger warhead with the PCML. Introduce the Carl Gustav you guys have lying around unfinished https://www.artstation.com/artwork/5V03E . It'll let us differentiate the AAF more from NATO, i.e. AAF MAT could use Carl Gustav while NATO uses PCML. Introduce heavier warheads for both the RPG7 and RPG42. Sights like the PGO-7 could be introduced too, This will allow us to give FIA/Syndikat/CSAT a standard warhead for use as LAT while the heavier one as MAT (or indeed, HAT). That's all i have to suggest for now. Would be great to have any of this implemented with Tanks, since the last few years making missions has been at times quite frustrating because of the limitations within which we've had to work. Arma's issue with combined arms is less "needs more tanks", but more to do with needing a nice smooth infantry-vehicle interface when it comes to balance. p.s. Would be great to get the M4A1 too, AAF spec ops would be a thing then :P EDIT: Seems the Carl Gustav and M4A1 were taken down, but here's a screenshot of the discord embed. https://imgur.com/AjfgKgy