Search the Community

BEST FULL MILITARY EXILE SERVER WITH MANY CUSTOM STUFF Discord: https://discord.gg/cUFWFQy ServerLink: https://www.battlemetrics.com/servers/arma3/17895683

Good Day Devs! despite the sunset of the Arma3 life span, I still hope that the game can be improved in the following patches. I would like to talk about countermeasures that are useless vs AT-Missiles. I often ask these questions: 1.What for in the Arma3 there are vehicles countermeasures ? Is this only protection from not Guided rockets (like RPG-7, like RPG-42 etc), while against Guided AT-missiles it should be useless ? 2. What for in the Arma3 have a signal of an approaching AT-missile (inside land vehicles) ? In order for the player to understand that he will die in several seconds? If countermeasures don't work against it, then the signal doesn't make sense Still I have no answers... When an opponent launches a guided AT-missile into a player's vehicle (APC, Tank), the player hears a shrill warning (beep), but why he hears it is unclear - the player will always be destroyed together with vehicle. AT-Missile approaching - At this point, the player can only make the following actions:. a) The player can release one smoke (from two available) b) The player can release smoke (from two available) and change his position (move). c) A player may release two smoke (!more his vehicle not have). d) The player can release two smoke (!more his vehicle not have) and change his position (move) And this is all that is possible in Arma3 and all 4 options will lead to the inevitable death of the player and his vehicle! Dear devs! if you read this, please explain - what is the point in the signal indicating the approaching AT-missile, If a player’s vehicle is not able to resist this threat? PS: I propose finally to set up counter measures in an adequate way. If in Arma3 there is no active vehicles protection, then the vehicle must be able to withstand enemy AT-missiles, and the number of smoke screens must be > 2. Today, armored vehicle survival is very low.

Hey there, hope this message finds you well. I just read a bit around this below, but no clue how I'll know through the code if the player's vehicle is amphibious. All I want is a bool value as a return. https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/CfgVehicles_Config_Reference#canFloat I've already investigated: https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/BIS_fnc_objectType https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/isKindOf https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/typeOf

Hey. Some thoughts that have poked me... With the reception interiors of armored vehicles , it seems to me, that time comes for a useful update, which can greatly improve the gameplay of Arma3. Today, (v1.80) inside the vehicles AI or the player does not have the ability to treat themselves, despite the fact that majority vehicles abound with medications. This fact looks, at least strange, if not more. It seems to me that adding the ability to heal itself inside vehicles would be a perfect addition for Tanks DLC, since interiors can now allow the addition of self-healing animation inside vehicles. I think this feature is simply necessary for all passengers. On the positions of Driver / Gunner / Commander this may be a matter for discussion. Here's how I see the details. if vehicle has medicaments, then: 1. On the passanger places the player or AI must be able to handle a wound. The AI always should do it independently (if he is injured and is inside) 2. With the reception of armor interiors, self-medication inside the vehicle must have the treat-animation in the sitting position. (one anim for all sitting) 3. If the AI leaves the vehicle and this AI not have a first aid package, then it should always take a nominal first aid package (one) with them. 4. The quality of the self- treatment inside the vehicle can have a different coefficient of recovery and can differ from self-treatment outside the vehicle (more or less effectively depending on the position and situation) @BIS, please think about these details. This can significantly improve the upcoming Tank DLC and the entire Arma platform as a whole

Hello devs! Unfortunately, after the release of DLC Tanks, the change of positions (driver/gunner/commander) in Arma was not affected at all. It was always a needle in my ass, but after the release of the interiors, this problem even aggravated. Why? After the release of Tanks DLC, I see how in half of second a player can find himself in any chair (driver/gunner/commander), without considering the inner walls of the vehicle and other units! Unfortunately, this looks not good. Please note, in most tanks or APC driver position has a separate location. This is a completely separate cabin, which is closed on all sides by bulkheads. Those. being inside such a vehicle, a person physically can not change his position - "from gunner to driver" or "from commander to driver" or "from driver to commander" or "from driver to gunner". This is physically impossible! Why do we see this in Arma? When a player changes all positions passing through the walls, then it looks absurd. I propose to take this moment into account and make a change of positions from the position of the driver (or to driver position) accessible only from the outside of the vehicle. In this case, the place where the player wants to sit should be free. So it should be in real life. For example. If you are in the gunner position, then in order to sit in the driver's chair you need to first get out, go to the driver's hatch and only after that sit on the driver's seat. Or vice versa. In this case devs, you can use the action menu (choice of place) or personal icons (when a player approaches a certain place of the vehicle) It seems to me that every interior, before changing positions should take into account the current position of the player. Most vehicles physically even do not allow (!not leaving vehicle) changing the position "from gunner to commander"and vice versa. For example, see Varsuk T-100 or Rhino. It is impossible physically to change position from the gunner to commander's position and vice versa. The main weapon prevents this! In this case, also it would also be good to change positions from only the outside vehicle. Such a feature could add a bit of realism (time spending for changing positions). In general, I want to say - in most cases, for change positions (driver/gunner/commander) the player must leave the vehicle and the position where he wants to sit should be free. Devs please try give the player a bit of realism on the backgrounds of vehicles interiors.

Hi Devs! Just some impressions of gameplay in the Heavy Armor Interiors. For me, unfortunately, playing inside the tank interiors, I got a big disappointment. On the one hand, the player sees beautifully modeled interiors. Yes, from the visual point of view, it looks great, but on the other hand, when you play inside, there is not even the slightest simulation which is necessary, according to the current interior. The my first problem - the player teleports through the bulkheads of the vehicle. I hope that there are people for whom this is also a problem. Soldier can change his position (driver/gunner/commander) in half a one second and go through any walls not taking into account the current interior. This point already leaves a not good impression for player. Next, I continued to play and noticed that the internal simulation inside the any tank or APC is just zero! After all this, I do not understand what the interior was for? It only looks nice but does not carry any functionality. Devs and users, please look at these screenshots. This is a interior of criticaly damaged tank: You can see that this tank is damaged by 90-98%. "HULL", "ENGINE", "GUN", "LEFT TRACK", "RIGHT TRACK", "TURRET" - they all have critical damages , but inside tank, there is not even the slightest visual sign of any damage! a) where is the smoke inside the cabin? b) where are the sparks? c) why do all the devices work as if the tank is not damaged? d) when you play in the cockpit there are no alarms! (alert sound, flashing light bulbs etc) e) when players tank get heavy hits, player not observe any slightest shaking/sway f) when players tank get heavy hits, player not observe any slightest sound of this heavy hit g) at any damages the glass of observe windows do not have cracks Devs, I hope after release TnaksDLC, you'll add at least a some simulation to beautiful interiors of all armored vehicles. If a tank of player get hit 120 mm or Missile Hit, then the player must feel it - there must be a sway and sound of hitting! If the tank is critically damaged, then the player cabin should have smoke, sparks, the screens must have picture interference or even lost vision, there must also be alarms

Hello. If we consider the upcoming update - DLC Tanks, then for me, creating the interiors (driver, commander, gunner) for armored vehicles - it would be the most welcome innovation for Arma3, which can be related to upcoming game update. Please Note. Today (v1.76) in Arma3, !only armored vehicles do not have interiors and this looks at least strange. Why such dislike for armored vehicles!? Why the player does have such a contrast in the simulation of controls of all vehicles and armor? I remember that OFP had interiors for armored vehicles and it was in 2001! I think in 2018, @BIS need to revive the old traditions, because any vehicle in Arma should have a interrior, then the player will have the same feeling from controlling all vehicles. In any case, equality it is a fair! I can imagine, that this is not a small amount of work, but such work, realy could raise the Arma3 gameplay to a new level! I want the users of Arma3 to express their thoughts about the interiors of armored vehicles, which are lacking in game. Subsequently, developers can consider this topic and draw useful conclusions. Welcome...

OK I have racked my mind out trying to figure this out. What setting(if their is any) do I use to prevent any vehicle from starting and driving once entered as a driver? Or how is this rectified? Vehicle control setting. https://youtu.be/F-DdfqhFEWI Thanks

Hello there guys I'd like to start this forum to discuss Arma III's last DLC for the year. I know its still a longs way off, but its never too early to start discussing these things. Well actually Bohemia encouraged us to give feedback and ideas on the their DLC. So here are mine. I'd like to brainstorm or suggest Tanks and APCs or upgrades or fixes to the current Tanks we already have. This is simply just a place to discuss Ideas and I don't except Bohemia would choose all of them or any of them for the matter. Below I will put some of the Tanks I would like to see make their way with the Tank DLC. LET US BEGIN! P.S If this is in the wrong section I apologize Moderators, please move it the correct section. The first Armored Vehicle I would like to see is the AMV-7 Marshall Mortar variation from the Pre-alpha that was never put in the game. It looks really great and I think would be useful when you need mortar support but don't want to use the large long range mortar Tanks. A variation perhaps for all the factions including CSAT and AAF. I would also like to see the AMV-7 and all the Faction APCs get more armor or perhaps add the option to add Reactive armor I feel like the APCs defiantly can be taken down too easily with Grenade launchers which is a main reason why I think APCs don't see a lot of action or seen on the battlefield a lot which kinda sucks when you want to use armor. I personally like the AMV-7 Marshall and wish I could use it more. I also feel like the Wheels on APCs can get shot way too easily so maybe add light plating that covers half of the wheels making them harder too hit. Also if you could perhaps add a 12.7mm machine gun to it, either that or change the description of the tanks armament. Next I'd like to see the American Main Battle Tank, but instead have the M1A3 battle tank the Military is currently developing and working on. There currently no blueprints or pictures of it for obvious reasons so Bohemia could probably use some creativity in how they think it will look in 2035. Here are American APCs that the US Military currently uses that would be cool to add. The M113 Armored Personal Carrier. Stryker LAV-25 Also the M3 Bradly Next up I want to suggest maybe a tank for the CTRG or the British. The M2 Challenger is highly regarded as one of the strongest tanks in the World or was atleast with only one being destroyed by friendly fire (Quite tragic) Now this amazing futuristic tank is real and is currently being developed in Poland as their next main battle tank. Its considered a stealth tank and by far is one of the most futuristic looking tanks we are currently making in the world the PL-01 MBT. It would only be fair to in cooperate a polish tank since ironically they are only one of a few countries who actually pay their 2% to NATO. This gorgeous looking tank I believe I already spotted in the Roadmap Video on YouTube, but if that's not it I'd like to suggest it now. This tank is currently regarded as one of the most powerful tanks in the world and can beat any NATO or US Tank. It also has some of the most advanced weapon systems and counter measures in the world and the inside literary looks like the inside of a Spaceship. The T-14 Armata. The T-15 Armored Troop transport Carrier. The BTR Bumerang The 2S35 Artillery Tank Now moving onto the Chinese or Pacific CSAT Forces. Not much is really known about what new Main Battle Tanks or APCs the Chinese are developing so I'll just add the current ones they have and maybe futuristic versions can be made by Bohemia. Type-99 ZBL-09 Not a lot of new Chinese APCs are being made atleast from what I can find. I'm pretty sure the T-100 actually is already this, so maybe Bohemia is time travelers or has access to super classified intelligence but this is Iran's newest Main battle tank the Karrar just hit the production lines this year. The Type 10 is Japan's newest Main Battle Tank and would possibly be relevant for the Pacific in Tanoa. The Type 87 is Japan's current APC. Germany is currently using the Boxer I believe as their APC of choice, although it has a similar look as the Stryker, but Id thought Id just put it here anyway. The AFF Tank is already based off the Leopard MBT so I won't include it obviously. Next up is Itlay's Ariete Main Battle Tank which I think would be relevant to Altis since Altis is suppose to be near Greece and Italy. On top of that the Greece use the Leonidas IFV APC which would also be relative to Altis That's all the Tanks that I wouldn't mind seeing in the tanks DLC, now I know you won't add every single one of these or any of them on the list and some of tanks currently in the game might already be based off of some of these, but these are just some ideas. Outside of that I wouldn't mind seeing tweaks and balances to the older tanks with a Dynamic Loadout system (Nothing too crazy) Just changing ammunition types or the Machineguns on the Tanks with perhaps different types of Defense systems like the option to have Smokes or the newest Active Protection system that some of these tanks have. The Germans are currently working on a 130mm Cannon, but they don't know how feasible it will be, but this is in 2035. So maybe change out cannons on tanks? Also wouldn't mind having Reactive armor option to add too tanks, but this would make tanks slower and eat up more fuel as a disadvantage if you wanted to keep things balanced, or add harder hitting rounds to penetrate the Reactive armor, or make tanks harder to kill. Heck maybe Reactive armor is already on some of the tanks, doesn't feel like it though. Should be able to add to APCs though. Also maybe add TOW launchers to the APCs to help with dealing with Tanks (Although I know APCs aren't made to fight tanks, but sometimes you run into Tanks). Also possibly add Incendiary rounds for the Tanks Commander Machine gun. These are all the ideas and suggestions I have, if there is something I miss or forgot, be sure to comment your ideas too so we can make Tanks Great Again!