Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

241 Excellent

About chortles

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Skype
  • Twitter
  • Youtube
  • Steam url id
  • Origin
  1. Sorry, but if you're looking in a mod's aircraft then you'll have to wait for them to update. That 'tab' is on all vanilla armed aircraft, manned and UAV, except for the CSAT (Pacific) Fenghuang drone, whereas Swedish Forces Pack's last public update ("public" here meaning Armaholic and Steam Workshop) was before the Jets DLC release so its aircraft don't have "Pylon settings" yet; I am not privy to whatever their private progress is.
  2. Jets DLC Official Feedback

    @ss9 The IR-only Macer has been dev-acknowledged but Bohemia unfortunately hasn't announced any concrete plans for official variants with different/multiple sensors; then again, from what I can tell the IR-guided missiles aren't supposed to need an aircraft's sensors anyway except for the player's marking/selecting the target -- at least if you can't get the target lined up directly on your cursor and want to use Next target (in vehicle) -- and the in-game AMRAAM/R-77 only needs launching aircraft info (aircraft radar on) up through the weapon release. As for the Gryphon's TGP, from what I hear that's actually closer-to-authentic, with the vanilla game's jets having artificially greater limits due to the whole 'virtual' thing...
  3. Correct, in-game IR missiles are supposed to work irrespective of vehicle sensors.
  4. Laws of War DLC Feedback

    Data lock was announced already so it was too late even before the reveal. Speaking of which, "there is just too little time until release to change anything about it" seems to have been a thing for every DLC Apex-onward, if not Helicopters and Marksmen too, which means that we can probably expect the same for Tanks' premium content too.
  5. @Jagdgeschwader "that a lot of faction mods don't even bother with" That's probably because so much of said "high quality equipment" are Chinese designs that are either exclusive to the PLA or being exported to non-Western/European/Russian forces*, yet we may both know how infrequently non-Western/Soviet hardware was modeled for the Arma series -- or heck, how infrequently specific non-Western/European/Russian forces are represented in community mods -- at least where English-only readers can see them, hence all the reskins of vanilla and/or Soviet hardware in prior 'PLA' addons for Arma 3. "itching to put China in their full glory on the field" This reminds me of a years-old claim that Chinese players were fine with Dragon Rising's PLA-as-antagonists because they also saw that game presenting the PLA as a serious, non-cartoonish opponent. * For example, the VN16 and VN18 export versions of the PLA's ZBD-05 and ZTD-05 tracked amphibious armor were delivered to the Venezuelan Marine Corps in 2014-2015, while African militaries have been operating wheeled Chinese armor such as the WMA301 vehicle.
  6. Regarding 15th PLA 45th Airborne Division, have you seen some of the latest updates for VME PLA? Air power is coming along over there...

    1. Nichols


      Yes I have and I am waiting on the official release before I pull all the RHS stuff out and only utilize that good stuff. I honestly can't wait for that stuff to get implemented.

  7. ARMA (#) future path

    @almanzo Interestingly enough, back before Bohemia announced that Argo was getting a formal release I'd been of the assumption that the Open Prototype phase would be just a 'live' learning/training experience for developers about doing competitive/e-sports TvT, after which such a game would be made on a different engine, 'Project Argo' having been derived from Arma 3 because it was readily available. @kremator Only if VBS Blue has 'everything Arma 3 has and then some', which when I last looked at VBS3's online documentation before BISim took it all down was most certainly not the case for VBS3... @drebin052 Anyone who doesn't believe you should just look up the KOTH-post-Jets-DLC posts here and elsewhere...
  8. @Mr. Rad I confess a certain surprise at anyone wanting to update my old port in and of itself instead of taking advantage of the one in CUP Vehicles (derived from my old port) or this so-far-looking-great 'F/A-35E'! @czechu777 I am blown away (in a good way) by your F-16C HMD/HUD...
  9. @AVIBIRD 1 Train111 has the right of it, the carrier's working as presumably-intended in that only the Black Wasp II and Sentinel have the hardware with which to be launched/recovered via the game's catapult and arresting wires, and I'd believe that the Buzzard being able to take off from the carrier is but an unintended happenstance.
  10. PAK-FA (T-50) AddOn: Work in Progress

    @LyotchikSniper You can also ask hcpookie, who I consulted with in implementing sensors and dynamic loadouts for their 'EF-2000' and VME PLA mod work.
  11. @jone_kone If you're willing to go the scripted route then one can just throw one of the game's radar-guided missile launchers/magazines onto the Cheetah/Tigris to have '35 mm' guns, radar-guided SAMs, and search/fire control radar(s) all in the same vehicle, with ranges of 7-10 km for the radar (depending on target background and radarTargetSize) while the SAMs' ranges and detect/track/lock cones will vary by your choice of SAM used in place of the default Titan Missiles.
  12. Jet's DLC Balancing REQUIRED

    @maquez das attorney already suggested two ways in which the KOTH designers could implement the specific sort of gameplay changes that OP was looking for while remaining exclusive to KOTH, nevermind that OP never addressed the (admittedly late) question of "if your Hummingbird is so hopelessly vulnerable or you're unable to maneuver your way out of a solid lock before launch, what are you doing sticking six-to-seven people into one?"
  13. Jet's DLC Balancing REQUIRED

    To be fair I'm not sure how this would work from a game engine perspective, unless the pod was a dummy with some 'if this pod is mounted, then IncomingMissile EH is applicable for the vehicle which has this magazine' scripting going on. Bohemia did mention the possibility of future pylons compatibility with external fuel tanks and electronic warfare equipment, but the only addition I've seen thusfar past bombs/missiles/rockets was the Twin Cannon 20 mm gun pod.
  14. Unfortunately I'm relatively certain that a lack thereof is why said parameter exists in the first place. We already know for a fact that radar cross section solely consists of the radarTargetSize value, hence the Black Wasp (Stealth) and the Shikra (Stealth)...
  15. @snoops_213 As per the biki, "The actual sensor's range is the smallest of [maxRange, resulting objectViewDistanceLimit, resulting viewDistanceLimit] but never lower than minRange", though from what I understand in the case of IR said range is then multiplied by a target vehicle's irTargetSize value, so you may want to test against ground targets with irTargetSize=1; if possible, i.e. my use of Orcas for testing sensors vs. air contacts. As for the remainder of your post, the IR and visual sensor templates' maxFogSeeThrough values are 0.995 and 0.94 respectively (although the BIKI calls 0.95 "approx. the normal visibility in fog (vis. sensor)"); the BIKI describes this parameter/value as "[a] fog threshold, sensor won't be able to see through a fog with higher value than this number", with a value of 0.1 being described as "sensor blocked by even smallest amount of fog" and -1 as "disable". Alternately, the nightRangeCoef value is a multiplier, with the BIKI describing values of 1 ("full range at night; if undef"), 0.5 ("range halved at night"), and the visual sensor template's 0 ("blind at night"). Note that in the case of IR my understanding is that a vehicle's signature is binary and static -- either detectable in a given situation (i.e. range, background, time of day, fog/overcast, etc.) or not, and the target vehicle's irTargetSize value (which affects the IR sensor's detection range) is not dynamic -- so differences in detection range due to variable such as how long the target vehicle's been warmed up, or how hot it is beyond "detectable", or the target vehicle's facing relative to the opposing sensor, seem to not be simulated, i.e. no "capable of detecting the Neophron at 5 km head on and 8 km from the rear"... unless you've found that they are? (Definitely no simulation of easier detection of targets in afterburner!)