Some sort of RTT on a screen for the front passenger to see would be pretty cool if it showed friendly vehicles in the vicinity with semi-realtime updates. I wouldn't want it to be some sort of pocket GPS.

Exactly.. its kinda stupid the GPS i mean you drive around in a milion dollar war machine and have to use a pocket gps..

It's not stupid at all I thought every vehicle would have incorporated something along the lines of the Blue force Trackers for ViaSat shown here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TZdaMVJb-4

Yhea the GPS system isntstupid im talking about teh arma GPS you cant really do much with it.

The map we have now is already like an advanced GPS unit and I feel only squad leaders and vehicles should be able to use its capabilities.This would really make squad leaders important as they will now control navigation,positioning for attack,receiving new orders etc.

Normal soldiers would only get non map GPS and a paper map which would be the same map but no zoom function or any other functions that the advanced GPS has.Say squad leader clicks on a soldier icon and gives that solider a way point to head to and this info then gets sent to that soldiers GPS unit.

Vehicles can navigate with commander clicking on way points or even setting a bunch of way points on the map and it is sent to drivers simple GPS unit.Vehicles also have icons on the map of all other armor to give them ways to plan more effective attacks.Maybe even ability to click on an armored vehicle and send it a way point like the squad leader does.

Thats exactly what i mean! haha you only described it a bit better.
The problem we have with arma now is the fact that everyone can use the map the same way and if you dont want that you have to put the dificulty up. Only problem with that is everyone gets the same crappy map system whitout anny info.

It's called Blue Force Tracker and is in use today by the US military to prevent fratricide (friendly fire). http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Force_Tracking
There's tons of info publicly available on it and shouldn't be too hard for BIS to implement.

It's got my vote.

Thats what i mean. THanks for the link im gona update the description.

Somthing like our modern day Blufor trackers?

Yes thats what we are trying to get implemented. I mean Today's Us army already uses these(they are testing them on the field). And this game is taking place in 2035 so. yhea..

There is actually a move away from NETWORK Centric warfare. Why? because there are very skilled people out there (Blackhats) who can crack encryption, break systems and networks with their guile skill and abilites.

Add state funding and professionalism (like in China) and your State Sponsored Cyber Warfare Teams can be extremely good.

Have your entire military force networked, might be a significant boost to your Situational Awareness, but if it's compromised your entire force disposition is given away to the Enemy, and given that 90% of Warfare is locating the enemy so you can bring your forces to bear effectively and then eradicate them, it is a significant single point of failure.

Even during WWII the Engima Codes didn't give away as much information as modern IT systems do, and breaking Signals is not easy but neither is it impossible. With Realtime Data it's likely to have less security not more, otherwise the delay between Encryption / Transmission / Decryption is too large to mean that the Real-time information is not actionable in real time.

Network Centric Warfare isn't viable even with Crypto and other security systems, it's all your eggs in one basket, and with the skills around the globe it wouldn't be easy to keep your security at such a high level.

For the purposes of the Game, you may as well do it and have GPS on everything because it helps us all out.

Well you are looking from a point today. Cyber warfare is an issue ofcourse. But todays top secret coding is so advanced it would take a couple of days to crack it(By skilled people) In thoese days security could update or become aware of the attack and launche a counter attack. Now this game is in 2035 who knows what happends 22 years from now :P. Annyway this would allso add different features. The ACUTALL use of radar emplacements meaning players have to set up radar networks and EG defend them from enemys. No fancy hacking and code cracking just a basic grunt defending a important military asset. I mean stratis has like 3 large Satalite structures on the map. WHitout this system they would become useless. If you would put this in it would actually mean that players have to defend it take it or destroy it to preffend the enemy from getting to know where they are. Maybey a bit exesive but its somthing i'd like to see. instad of having to kill an enemy whitout logic purpouse you actually have and thats to prefend the enemy from knowing where you are.

Note this could also bring in new game modes. Where you have to build camps with Antena's, defend them, destroy them, or capture them. I know this kinda sounds like a call of duty battlefield kinda feature but think about it. Today everything is so technologized what will it be in 22 years? Probably even more. who knows.

Rubbish, I work in the INFOSec sphere particularly in SSDLC.

There is nothing that cannot be exploited, nothing is secure, if you transmit you can be detected, if you can be detected you are "Seen / Located" and you can be shot and destroyed.

I did over 10 years in the UK military specifically in Comms, IT security etc. You are lulled into a false sense of security fighting relatively technologically challenged adversaries like the Taliban or insurgents, against China, North Korea or CIS we would struggle because they are extremely sophisticated from a Comms Intercept point of view.

Do you think the NSA cannot crack Foreign Military Codes? Or crack 90% of Encryption real time within minutes? Do you think foreign Intelligence services cannot do the same? Principle of least priviledge, and least transmission applies.

Just because technology has moved on, doesn't mean it's any more secure relative to the time it's in. It's a continual thing, like evolution, the threat evolves the counter evolves. But rest assured the Threat evolves faster than the defence and will always have a slight edge.

Will it be more secure than today, probably, will it be as secure relative to the threats of 2035? Who knows, but I would put the smart money on probably not.

? Lol NSA China North Korea CIS? I dont really understand what this has to do with my ticket...Im talking about an idea that could be possible in 22 years. Now 22 years is allot. I understand you are probably the only one in this community that has experience whit this. But i'm not shure if you can look into the future that far. And if so transmiting signals is so bad why still use radio's? Wouldn't that conflict your statement? Feel free to correct me by all means i mean i dont have knowledge about this wants o ever.

We have got very blazee, about transmitting Signals on Radio. Believe me if the Balloon had gone up (e.g the Cold War had kicked off) in the 1980's and early 1990's if you transmitted in the blind on any Radio Transmitter you would have had 155mm or 200mm+ Shells land all over you.

We have since 1991, had wars against nations who are tier 3 Military Powers e.g Countries who are no where near parity in terms of Technology or even close.

We still use Radio's because we can get away with it, that would change overnight if we went up against a capable opponent with DF /RF and ICOM. I would say we have selectively chosen to ignore the hard won knowledge in the military in the last 50 years and have been lulled into a false sense of security, and are continuing to think that transmitting (giving away your position in the Electromagnetic Spectrum is a good idea - it really isn't it).

So we have generations of people who think it's okay and there is no Risk and use the examples of the last few years to justify their position. You can jam a GPS with a device the size of packet of cigarettes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfPc8tH8vBY

Personally If I was invading a Country or had targets I want preserving I would cover them in GPS Jammers....."Wow look at your JDAM miss!". You could even Transmit it country wide on bigger Antenna's, then use GLONAS or another system like E-LORAN rather than GPS.

This Company....

http://www.rohde-schwarz.com/en/home_48230.html

Has opened plants all over the world (even in China) and makes some of he best Intercept equipment going - I would bet my pension that the Chinese have stolen all of their research and have some serious capabilities in this Arena and have passed it around their friends.

This game supposedly (once upon a time) was about the Greater Iranian Caliphate e.g IRAN taking over the Middle East and invading Greek Islands? Iran is pretty Professional, despite all the photoshop stuff, they are capable.

Anyway, In game have it and do what you will with it. Be aware that in any kind of "Full War" the Electro-magnetic Spectrum is, remains, will be deadly, and radio transmissions have to be burst, and extremely narrow, but even then, no guarantees you won't receive an artillery barrage on your position.

mwnciboo, why are you making such frequent modifications to this bug report, without making any significant changes?

It could be interpreted as bumping the issue to the top of the recent changes list for the sake of it...

I've always wanted to see more systems related to enhanced situational awareness, just like these kind of "commander modules" that gather and combine information into one module. They could also be part of EW that I've always wanted to see more in the game as well! Definitely upvoted.

@JindraCZ two posts is hardly bumping. ;) and that wasn't my intention at all.

I think I am advocating that we should consider a GPS enabled and a GPS disabled mode in the Editor, so we could have the best of both worlds?

It would mean we could model stuff prior to GPS easily, like the Vietnam Game modes in A2:OA, like SHACKTAC use. But we can enable it for Futuristic Battle?

2013-07-09 16:47 mwnciboo Note Edited: 0040608 View Revisions
2013-07-09 16:47 mwnciboo Note Edited: 0040608 View Revisions
2013-07-09 16:50 mwnciboo Note Edited: 0040608 View Revisions

Everything with no change...

+ add a tag called Windows 7 64-bit....???....reason ? Can you add a tag named by your procesor or graphic card ...?

So yes, you want be on top of changes

Hmm on my works machine on a River bed Encryption might be a Browser issue..

Apologies guys I've got problems with Firefox 22.0 update "multi-clicking" switching to Chrome, didn't mean to piss you all off.

didn't piss annyone off. didnt even noticed. But mister JindraCZ needs to take a chillpill. Since everyone does it.

Dupe of #4823.