Back in Arma 2, created balanced sides was not a concern. Now in Arma 3 we have two major factions who basically mirrored each other and a third government faction who is on the same technological level as the two super powers in the game. Two major super powers do not create weapons and vehicles filling certain roles because the other side did. Like Arma 2, Arma 3 should follow real life and not try to be some balanced arcade shooter. Real life isn't balanced and real life doesn't create mirrored armies.
Description
Description
Details
Details
- Legacy ID
- 3891842972
- Severity
- None
- Resolution
- Open
- Reproducibility
- Have Not Tried
- Category
- General
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
Let's compare all the vehicles, shall we?
Quadbike - Yeah, the same as it's always been.
MRAPs - Some are faster, some are smaller, some have commanders, some don't. I don't see the point of more differences.
APCs (wheeled) - The AAF one has missiles and a 30 mm cannon, the NATO one has a 40 mm and a 6.5 coax and the CSAT one has 2 less wheels (not like it makes a huge difference, though it's easier to disable it with small arms) and a 40 mm cannon with less ammo and without the APFSDS-T rounds.
IFVs (tracked) - The NATO one has very thin armour, while the CSAT one has better armour AND ATGMs. All other weapons are the same.
MBTs - They both have a 120 mm cannon, but the NATO one can carry 6 people in the back, while the CSAT one is smaller and more agile (or is it?).
Attack helicopters - The CSAT one is a flying tank, it has 8 ATGMs, 38 rockets and a 30 mm autocannon. In addition to that, it can carry 8 people in the back. The NATO one is very fragile, has only a 20 mm (pretty much useless the way it is now), 24 DAGRs (which are, AFAIK, supposed to be as powerful as the DARs on the AH-9s, but they can still take out APCs in one hit) and 4 ASRAAMs. It is faster and more agile, though.
Light transport/attack helis - Only NATO has them.
Medium transport helis - The PO-30 and the UH-80 belong in this category. The UH-80 is bigger and has just two miniguns, while the PO-30 has either no armament or 12 DAGRs and a 6.5 minigun.
Heavy transport helicopters - Only AAF has them (at the moment?).
Jets - Only AAF has them, at the moment.
Armed boats - The NATO and AAF have a 40 mm GMG and a 6.5 minigun, while the CSAT one has a 40 mm and a .50 cal HMG.
Uunarmed boats - The same for every faction, I don't see a point in them being different.
AA and arty vehicles - Okay, they're completely the same, just mounted on a different chassis. NATO does have an MLRS, though.
Now, the weapons:
Main service rifles - NATO and CSAT are pretty much the same, though since CSAT rifle uses a bulpup design, it has a higher muzzle velocity. AAF and FIA use a 5.56 NATO rifles, which are weaker than the NATO and CSAT ones.
DMRs - NATO uses a variant of the main service rifle, which has a uses 6.5, while CSAT uses a 7.62 rifle. AAF also uses a 7.62, but with bigger magazines, than the CSAT one.
Carbines - Both use variants of the main rifle.
LMGs - NATO uses a variant of the main rifle, while CSAT uses a 7.62 rifle, with bigger magazines, but a slightly slower rate of fire than the NATO one. AAF uses a 6.5 caliber LMG with bigger mags than the NATO one and around the same RoF.
Sniper rifles - NATO uses a .408 rifle with 7 round mags, while CSAT and AAF use a .50 cal Russian rifle with 5 round mags. All of them are, obviously, bolt-action.
Launchers - NATO uses a guided launcher that can lock-on onto ground vehicles, while CSAT and AAF use unguided RPGs.
Pistols - NATO and CSAT pistols are completely the same, but how different were they in Arma 2? AAF uses a 1911 variant.
Heavy pistols - NATO uses an 11 round .45 ACP semi-auto pistol, while CSAT has a .45 ACP 6 round revolver.
Heavy AA and AT launcher - OK, you got me.
This is everything I can remember at the moment, tell me if I forgot anything.