Mortars And Helicopter Rockets Dev Report | Arma Reforger

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 14 дек 2024

Комментарии • 113

  • @Looking4Mountains
    @Looking4Mountains 15 дней назад +6

    As I said on my last comment, I had spent 2 years in a weapons company. However my MOS was 11C (Mortarman) so I can speak on this as an expert.
    TL;DR Mortars are complicated, the game is dumbing them down, and being 'overly realistic' in some areas with unrealistic consequences. It could be better with simple changes, that they could still make.
    First, correct. The 'increments' or cheese charges as they are called are the propellant charges. The charges on the 800 series ammunition (M821 HE, M819 RP, M853 Illum) go from 0-4.
    That bipod looks correct as a K frame, it just looks skinny (nitpicky, I know). The character animation is holding the round too low, unless he is about to pass it off to his right hand. There is a distinct 'SHLUUUMP' sound as the round slides down the cannon, and I hope they add that.
    The M252 Mortar rounds are roughly only 7 lbs per round. When I was the Assistant Gunner (AG) - the person who loads the rounds - I would use 1 hand to make the 'ok' symbol with my thumb and forefinger around the fuze, then the rest of my hand would grab what it could, my other hand would protect the fins as you loaded the round. So you are correct while firing, I would have both hands free, both to check the charges on the round the Ammunition Bearer (AB) handed me, as well as protect the fins and keep the round centered in the cannon while loading as to not disturb the lay of the gun.
    I agree that the sights shouldn't just be blacked out, you should be looking at a blurred out version of the ground since the M67 sight is an elbow telescope (and I never met a person who turned it sideways to shoot, though it is possible) but since you aren't using aiming stakes I don't think it matters that much. Firing a mortar in real life would probably be too complicated/not fun to simulate in a game between indexing the data, getting the sight back on the poles, and the bubbles level. That and I haven't seen a game that has you use a plotting board to translate a call for fire, into a firing solution so... *shrug*
    I agree that the 81 mortar should be able to be broken down to its sight, cannon, baseplate, bi-pod, aiming stakes, cleaning staff, and ammunition components. Then either man-carried across a gun team, or carried in a humvee so that it would be realistic. Keeping in mind that you would need all of those pieces in order to make it all work (and even in a humvee that takes up considerable space) I think it would greatly encourage teamwork. I would love to see the 60mm mortar included so that just a buddy team could wreak havoc in hand-held mode.
    I think the 'too close' and get hurt mechanic is gimmicky. The overpressure of the 81mm changes based on the charge of the round, and I have ate plenty of blasts due to not paying attention, or the situation. There are long-term consequences, but nothing as dramatic in the moment as being knocked unconscious.
    The data sheets for the Soviet and US Mortars should be different. Our elevation scale goes from 0800-1600 mils. The Soviet made equipment goes from ~333-1000 mils. So for added realism the scale should be different even if the angle is the same. It looks like the firing tables for the 81mm HE maxes out a 2900 meters, when it should go to to 5700 meters. US Mortars since the change from 300 series to 800 series ammo out range Soviet mortars by a wide margin. For context Our 60's out range their 81's. The ballistic effects should also be different based on the fuze setting of impact, prox, or delay. Of course Soviet mortar rounds don't have multi-option fuzes so that should make a difference in game play.
    For the HUD: Players ought to be determine elevation to the nearest 10m with the map. When using elevation to determine the Vertical Interval you only round to the nearest 25m, so I don't really know what the developer is trying to do. The 'realism' in this case is weird and misguided. If you were a forward observer doing call for fire you should have to determine target elevation on your own.
    With the introduction of the Soviet 6000 mil protractor I would like the see the US forward observer 'observed fire fan' as a tool.
    Thanks for reading my novel.
    PS
    Here is a podcast discussing tactical usage of mortars in the mountains:
    open.spotify.com/episode/3Gxn4PrRDsWQxopKXng27v?si=puBjb0nzRnSfXDeEh1pg1g
    Free free to DM me if you have any questions regarding mortars, or call for fire.

    • @kcz1093
      @kcz1093 14 дней назад +1

      @@Looking4Mountains when did you serve? Only wondering because in the mid 80s the us army ( and i think usmc as well) adopted the m23 mbc and it was in operational service until at least 2008 before being replaced by the m32 lwmbc. Based on manuals I found ( fm 23-91 mortar gunnery) they should be 2 of them issued per assigned fire direction cheif(s) I figured having such a gadget would increase efficiency of mortar use even if it isn't a fire control system in the sense most people think of?

    • @Looking4Mountains
      @Looking4Mountains 13 дней назад

      ​@kcz1093 , 2010-present. We still have the M32 LHMBC. There are 2 per section. They still fail occasionally and we still teach, and use the plotting board a ton. One day we'll have an app on a smart phone (some guys have it) and it would make sense if the game gave you some sort of Ballistic computer, but honestly I would love if the game allowed people to do hip shoots.
      Glad to run into a fellow chuck in the wild.

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  12 дней назад

      I will pin the comment because very informative

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  9 дней назад

      I have seen some videos of mortars failing and the shell just flopping out of the barrel and landing 10 meters in front. What would a mortar crew do with that in real life? Duck and wait for it to explode? Or run away and never come back to that spot?

    • @WhyAreWeForcedIntoHavingThis
      @WhyAreWeForcedIntoHavingThis 9 дней назад

      ​@@caracal3892it never spun enough to arm. If you're worried about it then that means you're still alive to deal with finding a hole to put the round

  • @HuckOrris
    @HuckOrris 15 дней назад +40

    I think Bohemia is right to prioritize making the rockets work first, and add animations that don't impact game mechanics second.
    I don't understand your take on helicopter realism. In Arma 2, the Huey and Mi-8 fly very differently. The Huey is more maneuverable and easier to land in tight spaces quickly.

    • @TheChunkyMunk
      @TheChunkyMunk 15 дней назад +3

      this is true it is has nicer handling, however MI-8 has a higher top speed which is not replicated in reforger

    • @hunterwilson6703
      @hunterwilson6703 12 дней назад

      @@HuckOrris dudes got bird brain thinking mi8 is better than

  • @MrStrider28
    @MrStrider28 15 дней назад +29

    Sometimes you need to make sacrifices, otherwise putting 60 rockets each time would be too much of a pain

    • @Rebeljah
      @Rebeljah 15 дней назад +1

      True, full animation (taking munitions from a box, walking to the tube, then inserting the rocket) over and over would get old quick unless you have an ammo team working together.

    • @MrStrider28
      @MrStrider28 14 дней назад

      @@Rebeljah Yeah, like there are good animations in Star Citizen but they get old and time wasty really fast

    • @TholdrinTheAlchemist
      @TholdrinTheAlchemist 14 дней назад

      Well that is essentially how it's balanced. Huey has very few rockets compared to the Russian counterpart... but loading up 100 rockets already takes forever.

  • @WinchesterDelta1
    @WinchesterDelta1 15 дней назад +32

    It's not necessary to have animations for putting the rockets in the pods and complaining about it because it's not realistic. In RL it requires a team to put these things on. And you are not even complaining how he pulls those rockets out of his ass.
    Also the balance issue for the mi-8 and UH-1 is just made up in your mind. The UH-1 is more agile and because of that a bit more precise. And the Mi-8 is heavy and a harder to move around so only natural that it's a bit less accurate. Or takes longer to line up to be accurate. So it's more used to bomb a larger area with it's amount of rockets. So they are just mentioning the characteristics of the airframes. Has nothing to do with balance.
    I do agree with the animation holding the mortar. It's weird. But not something to be annoyed about to much.
    Also they don't put a protractor and ranging table in it if you can't disable the more easy mode. So you still can have it your way. For me personally i don't want to calculate all that myself. But yes it is more cool to have it your way.

    • @HHIBZ1
      @HHIBZ1 15 дней назад +2

      Totally agree with what you said most of the things he pointed out would just be adding unnecessary bloat to the game. I also had a look at the weight for a HE mortar round used in the 252 mortar and its only 4.23 kg the illumination round is only 4.58 kg so unless a person has the strength of a toddler you shouldn't need 2 hands to carry it. In real life you might use 2 hands just to be safe so you don't drop it.

    • @julienfrisson9372
      @julienfrisson9372 15 дней назад

      it will always remain more realistic with animations than without. even when we compromise.

    • @Kaade_Z
      @Kaade_Z 15 дней назад +1

      All of the things you said here were exactly what I was going to say, I also thought it was interesting how in the video he talked about the Mi-8 being a little heavier but then said it was gamifying things to have the uh-1 be more precise lol, lighter and precision general go hand in hand when talking about vehicles. The one I found really funny was how insane it was to carry a mortar with one hand lmao, brother The shells themslves would me max 10 pounds and are much closer to 5 depending on the exact mortar. I understand in practice they have you carry them with two hands but this is just a safety thing.

    • @TheChunkyMunk
      @TheChunkyMunk 15 дней назад +2

      @@Kaade_Z MI-8 helicopter has dual jet engines and has a top speed much higher than that of the huey, this is not replicated in reforger hence the disappointment, the huey however has easier handling

    • @fennoman9241
      @fennoman9241 15 дней назад

      @@TheChunkyMunk its just ~12kmh faster, but mi8 will destabilize a lot earlier than huey when reaching max speeds.

  • @imalilprincesss
    @imalilprincesss 15 дней назад +16

    After over 2.5k hours ingame since day1, My advice to any new player. Play the base game forget mods. Do the tutorial. Learn Everon. Once you do that no matter what map your on you'll know exactly where you are.
    Understand how radios work. You can carry as many as you want increasing you squad communication capability.
    Each squad has a frequency and name, and a quick tap of a button can open the squad menu giving you the names and frequency of each squad while playing in game.
    Understand how supplies work, and how important logistics really is.
    Establish front line bases. Prioritise base building and logistics to Tactically important points allowing for easy defence/assault moves.
    It helps having a base specifically for small vics, another base for larger/heavy vics, and another for choppers. (As a base is captured and the front line moves up, do logistics, allowing to build up defend, and have different bases be used for different things allowing the team to have a more diverse attacking strategy, so that the enemy won't know where exactly your coming from)
    Don't rely on helicopters. There cool and all but they are loud. You maintain the advantage if you have the ability to surprise your enemies, silence is best. I can hear a Chopper from 5-700 metres away, but a car roughly 100 metres max. They might be slower, but if you know the map you can easily avoid ambushes.
    If your in a squad, you want to respawn on a point to defend it, it costs supply points to spawn. Accept a role. Having to many items as part of your load out will cause your respawn points to be 250 or higher. By accepting roles and not carrying to much you may increase the points needed to respawn, but not by much. The base loadoit spawn is 25 points. Assigned roles may only be 75 to 100, greatly increasing your teams chances to respawn and defend.
    Soviet GL is OP compared to USA. Flat ground it can shoot 500m easy. Usa GL max only goes 350m .
    Wanna take out a vehicle easy without explosives? Tracer mags cause vehicles to enter hell after less than 10 shots. Extremely OP for both teams.
    An AT mine has a damage bubble. Doesn't matter where you are or what's beside you. If it's on the opposite side of the wall or below it in a house. If that thing goes off your either dead or KO'd.
    Wanna clear a building fast, or know that someone is watching the stairs. Just drop it under them from your inventory, no need to activate it, stand back and shoot. Once it goes off everyone above you will either be dead or KO'd. Just make sure to Double tap people. ( you can stand on the bonnet of a car and place AT mines so that they are hidden and active under wheels. No one will see it. As soon as someone hops in and moves the car an inch there dead)
    There are also a lot of hidden spaces in houses you can get to by just looking up and jumping. Some require a bit of parcore, others not so much. You'd be surprised where you cam go. If you see a log that's at a slight angle leaning against a building. More than likely you can defy gravity and walk up it. One of these places is the house opposite the supplies depot in arland. Has a great sniper spot. You can get up on the roof via this log, and Into it. It has a great sniper hole to overwatch and the roof is a great place to launch RPG attacks from 400m on enemy supply trucks.
    Supplies are king. Stop the supplies. You stop the enemy. Simple as. They are green dots on the map. Camp them. A struggling team will take from MOB or other bases seriously reducing the chances of successful defence, allowing for a fast and easy cap.
    Taking suppose from one base to fuel another is literally like shooting yourself in the foot.
    Any way. Those are some of the best general tips for any new player.
    If you want to seriously improve your game I have others.

  • @viewer54322
    @viewer54322 15 дней назад +5

    I like the range chart being held, desperately hoping they allow us to hold/view the map like that.
    Agreed on not gameifying things and not hand holding. I do not even like the squad leader icons showing on the map, its alot of fun having to read maps and is a skill that gives you an advantage.

  • @slamsgt6642
    @slamsgt6642 15 дней назад +17

    average caracal yap session

  • @LyricClock-fo8he
    @LyricClock-fo8he 15 дней назад +3

    It’s important to remember that these a things still being worked on and they’re just showing the community what they’ve made so far
    So whilst no animations is a fair point to be annoyed at it is just getting pissed about something still being worked on

  • @danielgyte8460
    @danielgyte8460 9 дней назад

    11:14 100% agree and was quite looking forward to trying to do the calculations for the mortar as fast as possible before the enemy moved. I get why theyve done it, itll be hard enough to get accurate calls for fire as is with people not knowing eastings and northings or even how to mark a building theyre looking at on the map, the added issue of figuring out elevation when its unlikely the call for fire will be within 100m of the actual target is probably too much for most players. The issue with this style of gameplay is that it makes it so that no one has to practice or learn, and if youre not practicing or learning cause the gameplay is too simple youll never put in the time to get good enough to be of any actual use to your team.

  • @ihavenomindandimustthink
    @ihavenomindandimustthink 15 дней назад +5

    At least they actually updated.

  • @tiberius8390
    @tiberius8390 12 дней назад +1

    1:40 I think the wording is just unlucky. Maybe they mean "more precision" because it's more agile and thus you can aim better with it. I guess they do not change the flight characteristics to make the helo's more "gamey" but tried to describe the differences between them. Devs said they would not compromise realism to balance things.
    For mortars it makes no sense that the character keeps their rifle in hand while operating the mortar. they should just let the character put the rifle away. Would also solve the clipping problem between the hand slot and the rifle.
    The HUD feature I think you can disable it somehow (server-side probably). But they need to make mortars somehow accessible for more casual players, too. So I get why they did it. I just hope they have no "Artillery computer" or anything like that in.

  • @tweedyharfunkel
    @tweedyharfunkel 15 дней назад +2

    3.14 kg for 2b14 and 4.5 kg for m252 shells according to google. So not that heavy not to be able to hold it in one hand, but it's kinda like going to gym ;-)

  • @KrissMeow
    @KrissMeow 14 дней назад +3

    Niche things like this are iffy, But personally I like the way it is currently. At what point do we start dragging in an entire crew to rearm this, and a huge cart being pushed across a field to rearm?

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  12 дней назад +1

      I used your comment as an inspiration for the next video. I think that these support gameplay activities would be a lot of fun if they were animated.

    • @tycandappa9829
      @tycandappa9829 2 дня назад

      That would be even more fun, holy cow that's an amazing idea tbf...

  • @Rebeljah
    @Rebeljah 15 дней назад +4

    I like the fact you are making constructive criticism, which is exactly what BI needs for arma4, even if I dont fully agree

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  12 дней назад

      Thanks, my worry is that they are skipping the high quality animations to get more content in faster, and that can lower the quality of arma4.

  • @Rebeljah
    @Rebeljah 15 дней назад +1

    Honestly i think the simplicity of arming is a feature, not a shortcut made out of haste. Even ARMA needs to balance realism and fun. Personally, I dont want to spend 15 minutes realistically loading munitions. Maybe BI is counting on most of the playerbase feeling the same way

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  12 дней назад

      However consider if the animation was very nice? And you can get more people to do it then it is done faster, it would increase teamplay.

    • @packwolf445
      @packwolf445 6 дней назад

      @caracal3892 no, it's just going to be boring and pointless.

  • @medln5357
    @medln5357 15 дней назад +2

    while most mortars are the same every helicopter has a different kind of pod with different kind of weapons, it'd be hell for modders to even add that to their own helicopters

  • @NCLB99
    @NCLB99 16 дней назад

    i dont know why but this is the first video i got shown on my main page from you in months. great video as always.

    • @NCLB99
      @NCLB99 16 дней назад +4

      reading my own comment and thinking that sounds like some fucking ai wrote it, holy shit

    • @jthom8226
      @jthom8226 15 дней назад +3

      @@NCLB99 Lmfaooo saw the first comment then this needed the laugh thnx

  • @Zarviya
    @Zarviya 11 дней назад

    Would like to see our character models two handed the mortar rounds instead of just awkwardly dangling it but LOVE how they look/sound/feel tho

  • @Bryansanto
    @Bryansanto 15 дней назад +3

    I respect your opinion about they lack of animation but imagine pulling down rocket from base near helis and then take 1 and then insert it 1 by 1 its going to be pain in the ass.

    • @abccde3832
      @abccde3832 15 дней назад

      Well Squad does animation for every reload for ATGM, don't see why shouldn't logistics take some time to replenish.

    • @Bryansanto
      @Bryansanto 15 дней назад

      @ problem is their Helis aren’t we are talking about manually inserting salvo rockets 1 by 1 into it while in the base.

    • @abccde3832
      @abccde3832 15 дней назад

      @@Bryansanto Seem that it takes 12s to reload Squad TOW atgm. Since heli has 5 slots in the video, assuming it takes slotting a missile 5 seconds we are talking about 50 seconds of work. Would you hate immersion over magical appeareance of rockets in the tubes?

    • @Bryansanto
      @Bryansanto 15 дней назад

      @ sure 50 sec immersion inserting rocket 1 by 1, while your frontline squad dying need air support 😂🤣.

    • @abccde3832
      @abccde3832 15 дней назад +1

      @@Bryansanto If frontline is dying and it can't wait 2 minutes for you, you got bigger problem :D

  • @Danlovestrivium
    @Danlovestrivium 15 дней назад +2

    The mortars in real life weigh between 6 to 10lbs depending on the type. Plus, they are always held by only one hand while waiting for the order to fire.

    • @fosty.
      @fosty. 15 дней назад

      What is the reason for only holding in one hand?

    • @Looking4Mountains
      @Looking4Mountains 15 дней назад +1

      @@fosty. If you have a round shouldered you have both hands on the round (especially with the 120mm mortar), then place the fins of the round into the cannon until the meaty parts of your hand rest on the crown of the cannon.
      But most of the time you only hold with one hand, because you can, that allows the other hand to change the charge of the round, protect the fins, or grab another round to keep up the firing.
      Here is a video that shows how you should fire in the mortar schoolhouse.
      ruclips.net/video/qAO1GCIa3yk/видео.htmlsi=dmas6ZK0ff1hpdTT

    • @WhyAreWeForcedIntoHavingThis
      @WhyAreWeForcedIntoHavingThis 9 дней назад

      @@fosty. Only one hand In danger of getting blown off at the wrist

  • @WhyAreWeForcedIntoHavingThis
    @WhyAreWeForcedIntoHavingThis 9 дней назад

    As a vet and game developer, Reforger is the first ARMA to actually get me to care and want to play the game.
    I've helped develop the TFC A3 mod and put thousands of hours into modelling and development but I've only played maybe 15 hours of the game.
    Because A3 was so jank. Needed a million mods. Everything was a menu or a key bind. I had to spend hours setting shit up and dealing with a million bugs.
    Yet with reforger I have a few hundred hours and sometimes it's real hard to get myself off the couch to go to work. I just want to play
    It's just -realistic-enough
    It's just - simulating enough-
    It will never be perfect but it will be so much better than A2, A3 and most VBS versions.
    I don't care if a helicopter loading has no animation, or if Mortars are a bit dumbed down. I'm just a dude, doing my job in this little war and for once I actually want to play the game instead of develop mods and listen to people bitch about how imperfect my free work is.

  • @kcz1093
    @kcz1093 14 дней назад +1

    BI created a franken UH1H huey just so the uS team would have a transport helo with rockets. . The Rocket launcher hardpoint being welded onto the M23 armanent subsystem ( m60 pintle mount) ive literally never seen. I dont think it even exists. They should have used the M21 weapons armament subsystem ( the cockpit has M21 weapons armament panel) , which has different mounting system. IT was not used on long body hueys, since US army used UH1H's purely as slicks, that weapons system was at least used on short bodies configured as gunships ( UH1B/C/M), and said system is possible to port to Uh1h as seen with Australians Army UH1H bushranger hueys, but of course this would be anachronistic anyways because by the 1980s US army was not using Short body hueys or those gunship configurations even if it did exist at one point.

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  12 дней назад

      This is very detailed information, I had no idea there was a short-body huey. Is there a limitation of a huey not being able to carry rockets and passengers? Is it weight? Or a tactical consideration or rocket gunships not being used as transport?

    • @kcz1093
      @kcz1093 11 дней назад

      @@caracal3892
      The Uh1 short body or bell model 204 was basically the original Uh1 airframe design , but although the moment it entered service Army thought it was too small for transport and asked bell for larger helos , so Bell basically just extended the existing Huey airframe length, and thus you had the Bell model 205 airframe, these variants for the army were the UH1D and then Uh1H hueys . The short body hueys in turn in the Vietnam era were largely relegated to gunship roles once the long bodies began circulating. The first Uh1D's were already being shipped to southeast asia as early as 1963. It should be noted that after vietnam gunship huey just stopped being used because the armed hueys were largely treated as a interim solution until a dedicated attack helicopter was developed, which was Ah1 cobra. I haven found any evidence of post vietnam of US army operated Huey gunships being used.
      Some military branches had a doctrinal requirement for armed escort/armed reconnaissance roles to be carried out with what they had. Hence for example you have the US marines putting rocket pods on thier Huey variant like the Uh1N in the cold war and still using them post cold war into the GWOT era, but not the US army. Its also in part due to weight considerations. Uh1's never had enough raw power to be able to do everything at once . IE : take full fuel load, have Defensive armament ( door guns) , offensive gunship mounts and on top of that still expect be able to lift an infantry squad or something.
      The us army did eventually see a need for armed escort & armed scout roles , but they repurposed the Oh58D for such a role, a helo which initially was meant to be a unarmed scout for Ah64 Apaches and Artillery fire support observation.

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  9 дней назад

      @kcz1093
      So the huey was more of a civilian helicopter then that was pushed into army purpose, whereas the Mi-8 was I think developed for the purpose, would you consider that correct?

    • @kcz1093
      @kcz1093 8 дней назад

      @@caracal3892 The Uh1 was originally produced due to Bell trying to meet US military requirements for a new helicopter that was installed with a turboshaft engine, and one that would be inexpensive to mass produce. Up until that point all prior helicopters had radial engines which meant they needed to be very large just to house that type of engine. Turboshaft engines are much smaller and powerful. So for its time the UH-1 was seen as a new technological benchmark . It only looks like a outdated design what contrasted to what replaced it. the Cold war was time period of rapid technological innovation.
      SO i wouldn't say Uh1 is a civilian helicopter pressed into military use, just because Bell tried to sell Uh1 via civilian designations after the fact. I personally have not seen many civilian Uh1's. Bell 206 Jetranger on the other hand is almost always associated with civilian or law enforcement use, rather then its military adoption as the Oh58 light scout helicopter. Bell 206 can be thought of as the Cessna 172 of helicopters I think UH1 became more popular on the civilian market only when many military Uh1's were retired from use and flooded the surplus market.

  • @StevenSeagul783
    @StevenSeagul783 15 дней назад +5

    The thing I’m pissed of off about it how they cheaped out on deploying mortars via a 3 man team just like how they said it would be done in the road map. I was so hoping they would have implemented that Mechanic for the turrets too.

    • @TheChunkyMunk
      @TheChunkyMunk 15 дней назад +3

      100% missed opportunity with tripods

    • @richardwigman4633
      @richardwigman4633 15 дней назад

      I think it's disappointing but as you mention in your comment, adding a full crew served weapon feature set to the mortars would mean having to retrofit it to all other heavy weapons for the sake of parity. That is a huge undertaking and probably outside of the scope of Reforger. I agree though that it's disappointing but I see why they did it and I think if they had gone down that road to implement it we would probably have seen a major feature sacrifice elsewhere.

    • @StevenSeagul783
      @StevenSeagul783 15 дней назад

      @@richardwigman4633 I think the pros out way the cons here but that’s just me. Also the way I imagine it, you wouldn’t even need a 3 man crew, you could load up a Jeep with all the mortar pieces and then set them up on your own.

    • @Looking4Mountains
      @Looking4Mountains 15 дней назад

      @@richardwigman4633 without having to make a tripod for the MMG's you could just allow people to buy a DShK or an M2 from the armory crate, with the tripod, and then need a crew to carry all of the equipment. That way you could set up HMG nests without having to use a truck.

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  12 дней назад +1

      @richardwigman4633
      Imagine how cool it would be. A high fidely simulation of crew served weapons in an fps game. That would be the ultimate feature that would make refrogger unique

  • @Everon_defence_force
    @Everon_defence_force 9 дней назад +1

    At 3:00 REMEMBER this game is just a test so don’t get too cocky with this complaining.
    Sorry if this was affencive

  • @shesstokedd4339
    @shesstokedd4339 15 дней назад +1

    Lol man this update LIT animations can be added later getting these features in make more sense. Also,
    Ai can use mortars also which is cool AF (curious on their accuracy). Its not a 2D minigame that very similar to real life it the Mortars can't see their target they have to be more accurate.

  • @zae495
    @zae495 15 дней назад +2

    Maybe stat wise the Mi-8 is better than the Huey, although the Huey is so much more useful it the current type of game we have. Really easy to fly. Can land it anywhere in a heartbeat. Quick hit and run tactics. The Mi-8 is just a big ass target in the sky asking to get blown up 😆

  • @Nutter-l3s
    @Nutter-l3s 15 дней назад

    I agree with your points. I wish they would embrace realism and Immersion. Thats what makes the game amazing!

  • @phat8976
    @phat8976 15 дней назад +1

    As a Mortarman for the U.S. army, I’m thankful they did not over complicate the mortar system, if it was 1:1 with real life using the mortar system would be a huge hassle and pain in the ass

    • @Looking4Mountains
      @Looking4Mountains 14 дней назад +1

      But the overpressure knocking you unconscious is dramatic. Having been a chuck who fired plenty of 120 rounds that never happened. You just end up concussed, not knowing you're concussed, and a decade later you can't remember shit.

    • @phat8976
      @phat8976 13 дней назад +1

      @ yeah it is a bit much, especially for it being an 81

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  12 дней назад

      I would not see it this way. Everytime someone said "that would not be fun in the game" someone makes a game about it and then a new simulator game is very successful.

    • @Looking4Mountains
      @Looking4Mountains 12 дней назад

      @@caracal3892 Getting a mortar up in Arma realistically would be akin to having a QWOP mini-game. It wouldn't be fast, or feel intuitive IMO. But perhaps you are right.

  • @Danlovestrivium
    @Danlovestrivium 15 дней назад

    You are correct. The horseshoes around the fins are extra propellant that ignite in the tube for added distance. The more you add, the further it goes.

  • @TheZabbiemaster
    @TheZabbiemaster 15 дней назад

    As long as the mortar is able to give me the raw angle/charge information I can use my calculator to fire mortars manually
    That's all I need

  • @thennicke
    @thennicke 13 дней назад

    They should've used the same animation for holding mortar rounds that's used for placing landmines.

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  12 дней назад

      I think they should do a custom animation for every held object. I also wonder why they did not put in the same animation work as with the landmine. It appears they just slapped the mortar into the left-hand animation and adjusted the hand pose.

  • @КостюмчёрныйНиочень

    Минометы с разными минами это то разнообразие которое нам надо после РПГ с разными снарядами

  • @TheChunkyMunk
    @TheChunkyMunk 15 дней назад +1

    I agree with many points in this video, I was hoping that mortar users would be required to hold range table, compass, and monitor mortar elevations manually, it could have been a match made in heaven but instead it is just a recreation of squads mortars

    • @OrthodoxArmyofChrist
      @OrthodoxArmyofChrist 15 дней назад

      @@TheChunkyMunk I saw somewhere that there is a range table which is good

    • @TheChunkyMunk
      @TheChunkyMunk 14 дней назад

      @@OrthodoxArmyofChrist yes one of the better features I think

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  12 дней назад

      It feels so wasted as a feature, if you consider how well animated the compass is in refrogger. It would be so cool to have one guy with a compass trying to determine position and the others assembling and adjusting the mortar.

  • @neptunecolony
    @neptunecolony 15 дней назад

    I don't think I can agree with you on the helicopter side of things. From what it looks like they may only be adding the smaller rocket pods for both the Mi-8 and the Huey however if there are 3 16x S-5K rocket pods on each side of the Mi-8 that is 96 individual rockets to load, and you want each one to have an animation.
    This doesn't even include the time walking to a box to grab the rocket, walk over and then load it if you don't want them to spawn rockets out of their ass.
    The Huey wouldn't suffer so much from this problem as it seems like they will only be able to hold 7 rockets on each side, meaning 14 in total.
    You must also keep in mind that it seems like they are just being given their lower payloads on 96 total rockets for the Mi-8 and 14 total rockets for the Huey.
    If they wanted they could add the bigger rocket pods which would mean the Mi-8 would be holding 192 rockets. Imagine, just imagine having to load 192 rockets individually with an animation and if you want full realisim, walking to a box and grabbing 1 rocket to bring over to the heli first before you can load it.

  • @banania3839
    @banania3839 15 дней назад +3

    Animating super rare actions that players do almost never is insane. Some people don't get that if you add this type of stupid fidelity, the game will never be finished and mods will have to reach an impossible level of fidelity to fit into the game. The priority and fidelity of content is decided by how much screen time and importance the content has.

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  12 дней назад

      However placing landmines is animated and would probably be used less than helicopter reloading

    • @banania3839
      @banania3839 11 дней назад

      @@caracal3892 I disagree, i think the majority of players will place a lot more mines than rearm choppers. In the end it depends on what the majority of players will do most of the time. Take tanks having interiors for example. Imagine all the mods that will never be because it takes 6 months to model the interior of a tank accurately and find sources.

  • @guerilla9one
    @guerilla9one 15 дней назад

    The thing is bohemia is well over wayyyy to behind with features etc.. I mean game master itself could really use some more features on Xbox and PC of course , like a trigger and connect/sync system to create ambushes air support etc... but the team working on Arma reforger isn't very big also the enfusion engine is also in development 😂😅, bohemia really just jumped right into this even mods aren't properly working possibly being from the engine needing capability to allow mods to interact and exist amongst one another 🤔

  • @WhoIsJohnGaltt
    @WhoIsJohnGaltt 15 дней назад +1

    If you just LOOK at the game. The game looks like an arcade shooter with how the metals look like plastic and everything is shiny. I don’t think this game is trying to be a “sim” anymore just a console shooter with big maps

    • @TrajanX
      @TrajanX 9 дней назад

      @@WhoIsJohnGaltt no difference than arma 3.

    • @WhoIsJohnGaltt
      @WhoIsJohnGaltt 9 дней назад

      @ no not much but arma 3 is slightly more serious. Atleast I can’t hop around like a rabbit in arma 3

  • @constantinouojoron5491
    @constantinouojoron5491 15 дней назад

    this is what I liked with arma 3, absolutely NO balance, and now.... Ehhh... I really love Reforger, though, how it's so much better than Arma 3, but also lacking so many things they could've made with this new engine... But instead they just jerk off on DayZ, ugh!
    I do not wanna play Arma 3 again, even though I love it and had so much good memories on it, Reforger is just so much polished and more advanced technologically (talkin bout the engine)
    And yet... DayZ... I know Bohemia has a different team or whatever for DayZ but shut up! It's STILL Bohemia! They could always just take some guys from that team and make them actually work on something!
    So much Bohemia could've done to make Reforger better... But I guess mods will save, right..? Oh, that's right, modders also are stuck on older games. Great!
    Though I guess there are a few technical reasons like the fact this isn't even an actual game and that's it's not released yet...
    What do you think? You think we'll get TES 6 before Bohemia does something huge for Reforger?

  • @Rebeljah
    @Rebeljah 15 дней назад

    I dont really like the "make it easy" features on the mortar sight ui. If an Army private can learn ballistics, so can players.

    • @Looking4Mountains
      @Looking4Mountains 14 дней назад

      For what it's worth, an Army private doesn't 'learn ballistics' as a junior mortarman you just know to index data. The role of the fire direction center (FDC) is to translate a call for fire from an observer into a firing solution to the gun line.
      But mortars are dumbed down in this game to the point that all of these shoots end up being direct alignment. So BI already made it 10x easier than real life by not having to run poles, a direction of fire azimuth, a mounting azimuth, or orient the cannon with 3 knobs along the x, y, and z axis.
      Not to mention PE, met data, or the dozens of other things that we actually have to account for.

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  12 дней назад

      @Looking4Mountains
      can you explain what "run poles" means?

    • @Looking4Mountains
      @Looking4Mountains 12 дней назад

      @@caracal3892, When you use a mortar in a true indirect fire manner you end up running out these candy cane looking poles which in a sense act as the 'front sight' of the mortar and ensure that you are accurate to 1 mil (17.78 times more accurate than 1 degree). Instead of firing a magnetic bearing for a fire mission you use a set of 'fake' numbers that relate to the mortar sight. When you emplace you get on a magnetic azimuth to the nearest 50 mils, then run a direction of fire pole, then set up the cannon (Video below shows this really well.) and place out a set of 2 aiming stakes at a near and far distance (typically 50m and 100m) these poles will act as a touchstone in the horizontal plane and ensure the desired 1 mil accuracy in the deflection. So when you compute a fire mission you turn 'real' magnetic azimuth numbers into 'fake' mortar deflection numbers. I hope that makes sense when you read it. (There is a reason why being a mortarman is its own job)
      This goes a long ways to ensuring accurate fire as 1 mil at 1km is 1m. 1 degree at 1km is 18m. If you only have 1 mil of error in your firing that is great. However errors on the part of the mortar gunner, the fire direction center, ballistic probable error, meteorological conditions you failed to account for, and the forward observer making a mistake there can be an unknown amount of error.
      EXAMPLE lets say the FDC makes a 5 mil mistake computing the mission by hand, the gunner makes a 2 mil mistake with his eye in the sight, and the observer made a 20 mil mistake by looking at tiny tick marks on his compass (which are increments of 20) and you are firing at a range of 5km. Your first round would miss by 135m. With a good FO you can get a subsequent round to impact the target, and then go to fire for effect.
      In Arma currently you can spin the mortar to any magnetic azimuth to 1 mil accuracy with no issue thereby negating the need to have any poles.
      ruclips.net/video/-yL7b2aJLnU/видео.html
      @ 3:08 you see 2 lights blurred in the distance, those are lights on an aiming stakes.

    • @WhyAreWeForcedIntoHavingThis
      @WhyAreWeForcedIntoHavingThis 11 дней назад

      ​@@caracal3892 he means placing out aiming stakes/poles which are sighted onto instead of using the sight to directly point at the target.
      This method is used to align groups of Mortars/guns together and produce different patterns and effects.
      The mortarmen on the line calibrate the sight onto the stake by sliding their bearing scale basically zeroing it.
      Then they get numbers calculated for them and sight on the stake
      A large straight object in the distance like a water tower can suffice in a pinch but the stakes are better for longer term positions. The benefit of this is to be able to fire indirectly from behind cover up to 5km away

    • @caracal3892
      @caracal3892  9 дней назад

      So about the aiming poles, I understand the concept, however would a mortar really have someone run out 100 meters in front to stick a highly visible pole in the ground? In movies mortars are always portrayed as firing very close to danger and behind sandbags. If a mortar would for example be 3 kilometers from the target, wouldn't the 100 meters closer to the front be already a very dangerous place to be in?

  • @tierdropp7544
    @tierdropp7544 15 дней назад +1

    This looks sad, oh man, what happened in the studio? How did they change direction?

    • @sipper.sipper
      @sipper.sipper 15 дней назад

      @@tierdropp7544 resources going to arma 4 + trying to get things acceptable for the PS store

  • @Foxtrop13
    @Foxtrop13 15 дней назад

    loading the rocket on the UH1 is logistics
    loading the mortar is combat

  • @leonwykes
    @leonwykes 12 дней назад

    I’m not judging but why am I getting a sense that this just someone yapping for the sake of yapping I’m just saying as IMO these things are more important than the animations the animations can be later if anything

  • @danielborisov6892
    @danielborisov6892 12 дней назад

    who cares about animations? go play call of duty if you want to pretend to be in a movie? UH1 is already unrealistic in this game...way too manuverable than in real life. The devs are making this game US biased with stupid stuff like the large MOLLE back pack and AP 7.62 rounds to "try to balance" the game. The game is supposed to be realistic...not ballanced.

  • @shotya9403
    @shotya9403 15 дней назад

    seems like its dumbed down for console

  • @danyzero6743
    @danyzero6743 15 дней назад

    Sadly, It's already a worse version of Squad 😂

  • @illie0709
    @illie0709 4 дня назад

    around 1.18 you talk about features are bad if not complete i must say you are wrong especially in reforger reforger is made for developers that wanna make crazy mods so for example animations etc they expect the developers that are out there making mods to do that in the servers they work on
    same for fivem a lot of natives and we can call the natives but the natives is just allowing use to make the feature work how we want same as for animation so if you expect arma reforger to become a game that is about becoming a complete game you are wrong reforger is released to make arma 4 that is set to come in 2027 so everything you see as in features are features we gonna get in arma 4 thats when they go for a full game release this is more experimental thing modders just made it greate