I request giving armored vehicles that can support it, a trophy system.
- Legacy ID
- Feature Request
Here is a video which shows the trophy system in action and give information about it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2IqZhonKzU
Russian system: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpmcmKwWzYo
not a fan of that ...
- how would you be able to destroy a stationary tank?
- The crew could be driving through urban areas without any worries. 'Nice' in reality, but not in arma.
put one enemy tank in a mission, and you couldn't win anymore.
please don't make a tank immune to everything.
The RPG-30 can get past the trophy system, so the "Trench Coat" system was designed as a separate system. But even the "Trench Coat can be evaded as it only works in close range and has limited ammo.
"- how would you be able to destroy a stationary tank?
- The crew could be driving through urban areas without any worries. 'Nice' in reality, but not in arma."
Note that the radar of such systems wouldn't work at nearly point blank, and wouldn't work time and time again. That being said, I don't know if I'm too keen on this either.
"How would you be able to destroy a stationary tank?"
Sneak up on the tank when it's idle, place some explosive charges, and voila! There are probably other ways as well.
If I recall correctly, tanks are particularly vulnerable to flames, so maybe some napalm or Molotov cocktails? However, that's not in the game (as of yet).
the video in the description (unfortunately pretty trashy) shows a 'simulation' of a rpg-like weapon fired at a tank from a distance of about 50m (in the russian video maybe 100), so if it were implemented realistically, that feature would make tank commanders pull out insane manouvers through cities and probably no combined-arms oriented clan would use them, because they just ruin the tension.
The ammo would need to be Extremely limited to not make it overpowered (2 rounds max).
the charge should be an option anyway, and the 'overwhelming with rockets' is just ... that doesn't work. Imagine, you need to tell the AI to do so, or you and your friends need to carry four rocket launchers to cover that scenario. I personally prefer a tank to be vulnerable, if put into wrong use.
if it had something like a 20% chance of success maybe.
ok, so if you implement that feature realistically it would mean:
- no use for hull down position (protection activates anyway and you loose one charge)
- who cares, whether you turn your back to an enemy tank (Trophy deals with it)
- don't combine a infantry squad and a tank in urban area to cover each other. If one of those charges goes off, it 'shoots like a shotgun' towards the missile. Don't be the guy covering that direction.
- if you have a infantry squad surrounding a tank (standard for my missions) good luck with sneaking to it, to place a charge without alarming anyone.
- ways to destroy a tank are limited to: spam rockets in a big battle until he is out of protection. -> letting a single squad deal with it becomes 'impossible'. (but is an essential part of a lot of missions)
Just to mention the price we pay. This feature is only useful when you have a tankbattle e.g 6v6 and don't want a tank to be destroyed after the first critical hit. Like World of tanks.
no constructive posts? Maybe I didn't explain my couterproposal in enough detail.
I said "if it had something like a 20% chance of success maybe."
and "This feature is only useful when you have a tankbattle e.g 6v6 and don't want a tank to be destroyed after the first critical hit."
The first one was my Idea of how it would still be useful in a infantry vs armor combat scenario. That slight chance of a missile completely fail to damage the target can e.g. provide a good alternative difficulty, when the aiming of your weapon system is no challenge anymore.
The second note was about how it can be used in a larger battle between tanks
as Laqueesha said: "the TROPHY has a limited ammo supply, so after a prolonged battle, it would probably be out of ammo".
So when you fight in tank vs tank battles it might be useful though it would also trigger some of the negative aspects I pointed out earlier.
Those are two possible ways to deal with that feature, but I am obviously still "not a fan of that"
Metalstorm has, as far as I know, just too many negative aspects, like low ammunition, long reload time and heavy weight, but I am not an expert and can't say for sure, but I would be curious about such a weapon (system) in arma.
don't worry about those bullets. I'm sure if BI decides to implement them, they would fake it as a single shot or stream. you probably can already fire A10 in Arma2 or gatling guns from a chopper ;)
@ProGamer hahah sry but only because its modeled doesnt mean its integrated!
Reactive armor? Modeled in Arma 2 but not integrated.
Emergency wheels on jeeps? Modelled but not integrated.
FCS systems? Were modelled but not integrated in Arma 2.
No - I doubt it is implemented.
But towards the discussion: I agree to both sides.
It could be frustrating in certain scenarios. But so is the thermal view at the moment. (look at this ticket http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=2899 )
On the other hand if only certain tanks get this system it would add an interesting part to the game.
I vote for a version of the tank with this system. But there should also be versions without it.
Ps: Some Merkavas also do have integrated mortar system. Just to mention;)
So as I see Merkava does have this system graphically modeled, even with proper sensors but it does not work? It is just a graphic? Are DEVs kidding us or what? Seems like aircraft that has wings but cannot fly.
This needs to be in. Tanks are too vulnerable to Infantry right now, especially at large distances (1 km out), where tanks often are unable to spot and/or fire at AI that is hitting them with missiles.
The smoke also does nothing to deter the rockets.