ehm...no

Suppressors for sniper rifles will undoubtedly be implemented. However, note that sniper rifles with suppressor are not all that stealthy. There's somewhat less chance that the enemy will pinpoint the location, but the supersonic crack of the bullet will still make sure everyone is aware of the sniper. On top of that, a suppressed 7.62x51mm will be heard to 200m in silent surroundings.

What about the ebr?

_crate addWeaponCargoGlobal["srifle_EBR_F", 1];
_crate addMagazineCargoGlobal["20Rnd_762x51_Mag", 10];
_crate addItemCargoGlobal["optic_SOS", 1];
_crate addItemCargoGlobal["muzzle_snds_B", 1];

Silenced rifles exist, why not add them in the game?

Keep in mind there is a difference between Silenced and Suppressed.

Weapons that truly are "James Bond/COD" quiet generally have an ultra effective suppressor that is engineered for that weapon, and even integrated into its design (MP5SD).

The kinds of supressors that have been included in Arma 3 (so far) are supposed to be interchangeable, and thusly are not engineered specifically for any one weapon, so they won't be as effective.

A sniper's main priority is stealth, reconnaissance, and protecting fellow
soldiers from and overwatch position. Even .50 cal sniper rifles capable of being fitted with suppressors although suppressors are more common with the CheyTac M200 Intervention and other small caliber sniper rifles .50 cal sniper rifles can use them as well. A Military grade suppressor with SUB-SONIC ammunition can be so quiet that you'll only hear the firing pin drop and a small gust of air come from the muzzle. I was in the U.S. Army for 6 years, I've seen these in person and have fired them with the above mentioned suppressors.

TAC-50, SV-98, Orsis can have suppressors

I don't see the problem with adding a SUPPRESSED sniper rifle, however:

• subsonic .408 CheyTac or 12.7x108mm? That would be absurd... the rifles would have to use supersonic ammunition with corresponding sounds.

• in ArmA 2 suppressed rifles couldn't use "normal" magazines. That should be changed of course, but then the sights and point of aim magically changes to suit the new magazine, which doesn't make sense either.

I'd prefer if any suppressed rifles simply didn't have subsonic ammunition, because it doesn't make sense how those rifles can't use normal ammunition etc. Especially things like subsonic 5.56 were silly...

As well, in ArmA 2 subsonic 7.62x51 was much more powerful than supersonic 7.62x39... what's up with that? Just because it says "x51" doesn't magically change the ballistics to be more powerful if the round is a 200-grain subsonic...

Once again they should just simply allow you to choose your ammunition. Create a subsonic or supersonic ammo for the rifle itself. It should not matter if the rifle is suppressed or not whether said ammo could be used. A Suppressed .50 is still going to be heard because after all that is a loud pop in the chamber of the weapon. Granted it is going to be nothing like it would be if if the weapon was unsuppressed. I agree with Suppressed Sniper Rifles. This is a simulation game and if you can use them in real life with supersonic Ammo or Subsonic Ammo why not give the players their realistic options. Also Make sure that the suppressors don't reduce damage or anything like that. There are suppressors that can even make weapon systems more accurate and not reduce their muzzle velocity. All a Suppressor does is absorbs the gases released at the end of a barrel to help reduce the sound waves sent out by their release. That doesn't mean that they reduce anything on the round though, they do reduce weapon signature.

This should happen, and it is long overdue.

Why:

1. There is no difference in suppressing one of these rifles vs suppressing one of the other rifles in the game other than the scale and design of the suppressor. A .50 BMG suppressor is to a 7.62x51 suppressor what that suppressor is to a 9mm suppressor … it’s just a matter of scale.

2. The exact same supersonic crack issue applies to the smaller rifles, submachine guns, and most handguns. The fact that these are larger rifles / calibers means nothing … same technology, same results, same tactical / gameplay / AI considerations. Do you want a weapon that has a massively reduced muzzle blast? Of course you do. Put a can on it. The other factors remain, but you’ve gained one huge advantage.

3. They supersonic crack gives away presence, not location: the sound is not directionally indicative. (This is fact, not opinion; if you disagree with this, please do your research as it’s not a point which is worth arguing.) The game itself emulates this … you cannot tell the location of the shooter from the snapping sounds as the bullets pass by you. As for the sound giving away your presence in general, that’s a given and applies to all of the the suppressed rifles in the game. (And I don’t see any feedback requesting that suppressors should be removed entirely.)

4. The subsonic ammo issue is a completely different topic. Yes, it eliminates the supersonic crack; It also completely changes the ballistics and effective range and power of the weapon. In some cases this is slight: The speed of sound is 1,100 feet per second … slowing a handgun caliber to below this threshold does not have nearly the impact on the original ballistics as doing the same thing with a rifle cartridge. Due to point 3 above, this is a non-issue with long range shooting.

Summary:

Suppressing the sniper rifles is exactly the same as suppressing the other rifles, SMGs, and handguns, which is why it’s done IRL. Because of this one fact, all of the other factors are moot.

Closing:

ARMA is a simulation more than a ‘game’, so there is no need for so-called ‘weapon balancing’ (if that’s why they have omitted suppressors on the sniper rifles). Long range accuracy AND suppressed doesn’t seem fair? Play a different game then. ARMA isn’t about ‘fair’, it’s about realism.

They're a tool that does one thing ... why argue whether something belongs in the game when it exists in the real world? That should be reason enough to have it.

I'm sad to see that there has been no activity on this issue as it seems like such a fundamental shortcoming for this franchise.

Source:

Personal experience working in the firearms industry ... yes, including suppressors. :-)

Why the CheytacM200 didnt have a supressor in the Arma3 Game, in the "Breakingpoint" Zombie Mod the M200 is available with a supressor. Should be a small fix to implement the supressor into the main game.

I don't think the current .50 cal snipers in game should have suppressors. It's just not practical. However, I think in the marksman DLC, they will probably add smaller sniper rifles (for example, the M40A5 and M21 rifles), and these should most definitely have suppressor options.

Cheytac M200 Intervention isn´t a cal. 50 Rifle...

While we could possibly see this kind of stuff with the Marksmen DLC, i wouldn't mind seeing suppressors for the Large guns. My view point is make it suppressed, but make it the supersonic suppressor. Therefore, it can be heard in absolute silence obviously, but significantly quieter than if not suppressed. But during a large battle, you may not pick up the sound, which i the best time for a silenced sniper to take action whilst there is plenty of Audio distraction to hide in.

yes, it's .408 but that's not the point. I suppose if they were to be supersonic suppressors it would be better, but are any suppressors in arma 3 subsonic? You can still hear the crack of the bullet pass, even if the gun was suppressed. It would be pretty cool if they added subsonic ammunition, made suppressed but not supersonic guns more damaging, and more audible. Would add a whole additional dimension to the mechanic.

It’s great to see some discussion on this topic again!

I respectfully, but strongly disagree with any reasoning based on opinion of the devices, their use, or their affect on gameplay. I cannot emphasize this enough as such arguments are entirely subjective; based solely on personal preference of gameplay, and personal understanding (or lack of) the technology and it’s effective deployment in the field.

Let me reemphasize my primary point, and it’s supporting logic, with this bulleted list:

— Large caliber suppression exists and is used extensively in current day military systems.

ARMA is a simulation, not a game, therefore the above criteria should be the beginning and end of the entire question of suppressors for rifles of all calibers.

Every other factor is personal opinion, and making decisions about whether or not to include combat proven equipment that is (especially in the game) decades-old, designed specifically for the decades-old weapon technology, and has been effectively and extensively used in the field for decades, is what pushes ARMA onto the slippery slope of becoming just a game. Worse, and perhaps most selfishly, it unfairly foists artificial limitations on every player’s personal play style by limiting the equipment available to them.

Here’s an example of the arbitrary nature of such limitations: I can fly a helicopter with a keyboard and mouse. I can run, jog, walk, even up steep grades, without ever having to rest, even with a heavy pack. I can use a plethora of advanced, even futuristic weapons systems. I can shoot at someone over a kilometer away with a suppressed .30 caliber rifle. However, I can’t shoot at someone at greater distances with a suppressed rifle of a larger caliber, despite the fact that the technology of being able to do so is exactly the same, just as common, and utilized in the field for the exact same reasons as the suppressors that are already present in the game … suppressors that I am happy to have and use.

Anything other than, “Does it exist in the mainstream lineup of military weapons systems of the real world?” is arguing for an arbitrary limitation on the game based on personal opinion. Please don’t do this to this amazing franchise. If anything, let this topic stand as the perfect example of a change being made to the game based on the aforementioned, to-the-point logic and reasoning.

To touch one more time on the issue of subsonic ammo: A suppressor performs the same function, regardless of caliber or velocity of the projectile ... it reduces the muzzle blast of the weapon by slowing and cooling the expanding gasses from the burnt/burning propellent before it reaches the external atmosphere, and in some designs uses resonant cancelation to convert the sound waves into heat.

Subsonic ammo has a specific application for shorter range situations that does not apply to the rifles in question. It's a legit request / topic, but is one that is independent of the specific topic of suppressors for sniper rifles where the very design of the rifle, the lands and grooves and twist-rate of the rifling, barrel length, etc, are all designed around a specific envelope of projectile weight and velocity.

Thank you,

• Doc

the engine is not that advanced that it can emulate perfectly the supressors and ammo and all that, i highly doubt they can make ammo have different balistics, if they do, maybe they can. ( already think the way they make actual suppressors work is absurd)

You didn't specify which aspect you feel is absurd. (or offer anything to support the opinion)

Is it the ballistics?
The range at which AI hear the weapon?
The way the AI reacts to being under fire at long range by a suppressed weapon?
They way they are interchangeable between most weapons of the same caliber?
The modeling of them?
The sound effects?
The method of attaching and removing them?

Voting against this issue based on how you feel about the suppressors in the game as a whole is misguided. If that's how you feel, then give that feedback in the correct place: Post your own suggestion to change / remove the current suppressors and then up-vote it.

The engine is already using ballistic modeling, and fortunately there is little, if any change needed in the addition of the suppressors. Games that greatly reduce the effectiveness of suppressed weapons versus their unsuppressed configuration are completely full of crap and do that out of a sense of balancing gameplay. Super heavy use of the word "game" when it comes to titles that do that kind of thing.

For what it's worth, I feel that the suppressors in the game are relatively realistic; a modern suppressor has little impact on the performance of the projectile or accuracy of the weapon. (and the affects that it can have can be both positive and negative)

I feel fortunate to have spent time working with these types of devices (demonstrating, testing, and selling), but it probably does make me come across as a little stubborn on this topic. I'm happy to clarify the facts in any way that I can, and I hope that this feedback topic does not get too many holes shot into it by those who are either unsure of how these devices work, or who are missing the point of the original post. It's not about suppressors in general or the concept of subsonic ammo.

It's simply a question of why we currently have options A-D, but not options E and F.

I am hoping that someone who actually works for the company will participate in the discussion!

• Doc

If you look into arma 3 weapons_f under the m320 , in UI pics there you see there was suppressor for m320 at least planned but later they changed their mind i guess

why is it absurd? well, i dont expect in real life to pick up a TAR, pick up a standar 5.56 suppressor, fit it in, and out of nowhere my shots are silent, nothing would be heard out of a 75 meters radious, and that the recoil has increased, if the suppressors would actually decrease the performance of the gun i would think its even more absurd, but the fact is that suppressors use real life penalties on the guns with the hollywood advantages, wich makes them OP.

Are you happy? or are you gonna make another 30 lines comment about why the game is right and i am wrong ending in your signature (even thought we can see your name)?

This isn't about you or I being right or wrong ... facts are facts, and the game sticks to them somewhat reasonably or it doesn't. If the game imposes any limitations to suppressors that do not exists IRL, or if it gives them advantages that they should not have such as the rolloff distance being too short, then the developers need to hear that via this forum.

The way to do that is to post suggestions specific to a given issue, and to stay on-topic in existing threads.

This thread has nothing to do with the general implementation of suppressors in Arma 3, the use of subsonic ammunition, or the myriad considerations in how to effectively and practically utilize suppressors in the field ... but almost all of these things tend to come up when the subject of suppressors comes up in any game-related forum.

Having said that, a few sincere questions:

Does the game increase recoil on suppressed weapons? (I've honestly not noticed.) If so, that would be ridiculous indeed. As of a few years ago, the majority of shooters in high-end, long-range competitive rifle matches use suppressors because of the significant reduction in recoil and, as reported by most of the shooters who use them, improved accuracy.

As for the suppressed muzzle report, do we know the actual "rolloff" distance for the various suppressors in the game? I agree that the distance at which the muzzle report is detectable is important, but when it comes to long-range shooting, which is after all the very specific topic of this thread, the point is moot. Again, a good topic to suggest via this forum in it's own thread since it does not apply to this one.

The wonderful thing about modern suppressors is that they do in fact have advantages with few, if any, penalties. The reason most games impose fictional penalties (reduced accuracy, reduced power, etc) is, IMO, to appease players who whine about it being unfair that someone can engage them from long distances while remaining effectively hidden due to the lack of a detectable muzzle report. Sadly for those players, weapon systems are not generally designed with an eye toward fairness.

It took me a moment to understand what you meant about my "signature". :-) I suppose it's a deeply ingrained habit from years of professional and personal written communication. Experience is funny that way.

Very best regards,

-Doc

well, sorry about that, but still, suppressors are not this effective in-game, not without subsonic ammo, wich again, i doubt the engine supports

I think it would be possible for subsonic ammo to be supported. If the config containing the sonic snap of the bullet (I assume it does, rifle rounds create very different sounds than .50 HMG rounds do as they fly by), you would just set it to 0 (or very low so that it still made a zip sound), and then decrease its ballistic effectiveness.

but then, SS ammo would not even reach more than a few hundreds metters, as the big point of the snipers is that their bullets can go up to mach 3.

Yes, If you look up a few comments you will see I had the same point, I think subsonic ammo should only be implemented for 7.62 rifles and below. DarkSideOfficial had a good point, he said that there would be suppressors available for .50 and .408 rifles, but not subsonic ammo. You would get just a little bit of lowered volume, and the effectiveness wouldn't be affected as much.

yeah, but its not just about the 7.62 but about how the SS ammo changes ballistics, most SOFs like to use SS ammo on their pistols because the ballistics wont decrease as much, because the pistol rounds are either a little bit above mach 1 or almost there. Suppressors alone, for a 7.62, assuming we are talking about an M40A1/M42, wich reaches almost 1 kilometer, and to have the sound reduced to 200 meters its a wet dream for any stealth sniper, though.

Suppressors would be perfectly realistic and believable for these weapons. But we don't really need them with this current sound system. :P the sound just fades out over distance (except reloading, that travels into neighboring countries).

But then the argument would be that we don't need them for any of the weapons. :-) In the distance that the sound has not faded out yet, someone would have a chance to determine which direction you are in. In the end, that's the only point of suppressors in this context anyway ... limit the range at which you can be located by the sound of the muzzle report.

TBH, I don't get the feeling that the company looks at these threads much. Perhaps the Marksman DLC will have it if they are focusing on more realistic long range weapon systems.

Think of it like this, a snipers main priority is stealth and many snipers or sharpshooters prefer to work with suppressors on their weapons because it increases the chance the enemy will not be able to react as quickly as they do if an non-silenced rifle goes off. Be it 200m, or 1200m the AI know where the shot comes from, so in my opinion adding silencers/ suppressors is a must.

Referencing COD is stupid imo. That game isn't realistic in any sense of the imagination so comparing that to arma 3 is pointless.

I think the Marksmen DLC helps with that - most of them have silencers and there is even a completely suppressed (recoiless?) rifle, the ASP-1 Kir.

there is a HUGE difference between "silenced" sniper rifle and "suppressed" sniper rifle. just because you put a can on a sniper it doesn't make it silent. a TRUE "silenced" sniper rifle such as the VSS vintorez and the new ASP-1 fires SUB-sonic rounds so there would not be a sonic boom to giveaway your position. a "suppressed" sniper such as those indicated by the OP only hides the muzzle flash of the gun, it can NOT remove the sonic boom from the bullet as long as it is traveling as supersonic speed.

Jesus how misinformed are you? "silencer" its just another name for the suppressor. A suppressor removes the gas expansion of the gun. Contrary to videogame's logic that adding a suppressor makes the game quiet as a footstep is wrong. Contrary to "i saw a gun once in my life" logic that using a suppressor barely helps in hiding its soundprint its also wrong. A suppressor not only hides the supersonic sound trace of the bullet but it REALLY does makes your gun far more silent than before. In fact, to make it even more quiet, people sometimes use less powerful ammo wich is subsonic, but that's barely even used it nowadays.

Those things like VSS or MP5SD are MADE from design to be silent, that's why they are silent.

Let's wrap this up!

THE SUPERSONIC CRACK OF THE PROJECTILE

This sound is not affected by a suppressor, but what most people don't understand is that it is virtually impossible to determine point of origin, or even the general direction of the source, based on this sound. When using a suppressor to reduce the chance of the shooter's location being determined, this sound is moot as it only reveals the fact that there IS a shooter. This is unavoidable in shooting at any range beyond a couple hundred meters because ...

SUBSONIC AMUNITION

Only useful in a situation where the reduced velocity of a given cartridge does not render its ballistics ineffective. Can you hit and eliminate a target at 1,300m with a 9mm or .45 auto pistol? How about 500m? 300m? Of course not. But that's the kind of velocity you're looking at to get below the supersonic threshold. (1,100 fps / 340 mps) It doesn't matter what kind of weapon or caliber you have ... that's the speed limit if you want to eliminate the supersonic crack.

Subsonic ammo is so limited in application that it's not a valid argument when it comes to any kind of long-range shooting.

FORGET CALIBER, WEAPON, GAMES, MOVIES, SEMANTICS, NIT-PICKING SCENARIOS, ETC

A suppressor reduces the sound signature of a weapon. PERIOD.

Proper deployment / tactics take advantage of that fact to varying degrees. PERIOD.

This is your choice in real life:

BOOM! (directional sound detectable out to x meters) + CRACK! (nondirectional sound)

VS

Suppressed BOOM! (directional sound detectable to x meters - y meters) + CRACK! (nondirectional sound)

The second option makes the shooter's location less detectable by y meters. PERIOD.

People arguing every possible scenario need only refer back to this simple choice. Do you want the advantage offered or not? That's your choice and you should be able to exercise that choice by equipping a suppressor or not. The choice should NOT be based on the arbitrary exclusion of the suppressor in the first place.

As for how a game implements anything at all, THAT is what feedback is for. "The physics of this that or the other thing needs to be tweaked." NOT, "Even though this exists in real life, I think it should be omitted because I think it should be."

SUPPRESSORS FOR THESE CALIBERS EXIST IN REAL LIFE

This should really be the only argument necessary for including them in the game!

Examples:

http://www.opsinc.us/suppressors/3rd%20Model-50-Cal-MBS.html

https://www.barrett.net/firearms/qdlsuppressor

http://www.advanced-armament.com/assets/images/pdf/p034_OPTECH_0408.pdf

http://www.ammoland.com/2010/03/turbodyne-suppressor-for-50-bmg-rifles/

http://www.qsmsilencers.com/50%20bmg%20suppressor%20stats.html

http://eliteiron.com/elite-iron-suppressors-Windtalker.html

http://www.thorgdg.com/shop/thor-trsp408-408-suppressor/

http://cheytac.com/componets/suppressors/

http://www.qsmsilencers.com/408%20suppressor%20stats.html

Etc, etc, etc.

Seriously; this entire discussion should end right here. They already exist! Put them in the game!

LET THIS BE THE END OF THE DISCUSSION

I cannot make this any clearer to the people who don't like the idea of having suppressors for these weapons in Arma. There is absolutely no valid argument against it other than for "gameplay" reasons. IMO, gameplay reasons are what force an otherwise great simulator into being just a game.

What is your favorite aspect of the game that simulates something that exists in real life? I could whine and piss and moan about whatever it is and come up with reasons why it shouldn't be in the game. I would be wrong to do so because none of my arguments would counter the fact that it's something REAL.

If you read my previous posts in this ticket, you'll see that I've gone over this stuff multiple times. I can only imagine that people still arguing against it have not read anything other than the title of the ticket.

-Doc

Eh, yeah. The ticket is fulfilled with the release of the DLC.

To be clear: You're saying that the DLC adds the suppressor attachments for the vanilla .50 and .408 rifles? Because that's what this ticket is about. The ticket is not about asking for the ability to purchase the feature for the vanilla game where it is inexplicably absent.

In short, the DLC has nothing to do with this ticket as it's not a request for new weapons or new attachments.

-Doc

I can't see any such statement or mention in the original ticket, you just project your own wishes into it.

Considering the timeline of events, and the specificity of ticket 0011184, which was closed as a duplicate to this one, I must respectfully disagree.

Regardless, since this ticket is now closed, I have opened a new Feature Request that I believe reflects what I believe to be the original intent of this ticket and it's duplicate.

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=23751

Real life variant CheyTac M200 can be equipped with a suppressor..
How come we still don't have it here?

Dear fireball.... I personally think, that supressors, sight and other accesories FOR WEAPONS, THAT ARE IN VANILLA GAME, SHOULD BE AVAILABLE WITHOUT DLC. Its same situation, when i sell you a fully finished car that i work on, and if you will take it i will tell you - OK, you must pay me for the wheels, and drive wheel. There was (is...) one company what makes absurds like DLC, its named Ea Games. You want to finish like them?

Ticket #23751 was acknowledged by BI, so maybe maybe...but only maybe.

I'm not an influencer (specially not on features), I'm just helping keeping this tracker tidy. A new ticket was really the best way to get the proper attention. So vote up on #23751.

isn't that making a duplicate just for the sake of getting attention?

No. The feature requests differ, as I have explained above.

Originally only a "Silenced Sniper Rifle, use for stealth mission/assassination mission" was requested, which was provided, albeit through DLC.

I'm closing this one, as this discussion is unnecessary and the other ticket is sufficiently specific.