>Arma 3 main campaign. >set in 2035. >1 (one) use of a quadrocopter drone in combat

>Arma 3 main campaign
>set in 2035
>1 (one) use of a quadrocopter drone in combat
>all the reconnaissance and target designation is done by infantry
>armor is a major threat to infantry
>1954 guerilla infiltration tactics still work

>meanwhile in 2024
>10 drones of various types used in every single battle per every single soldier, drones are as disposable as RPG rockets
>all recon and target designation is done via small and large drones
>artillery (even old artillery) shits all over everything, it's a real challenge to even get armor to the front before it's blown up by drones/artillery
>battlefield is completely transparent for both sides for dozens of miles at all times
>any attack is almost guaranteed to fail, but mechanized pushes in particular are doomed
>80-year old blast mines are incredibly effective against the most modern tanks

And so on, and so on ad infinitum. What will the actual 2035 war look like, as opposed to the nonsense the media fed us for the last 30 years?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Going by how things are developing we can't even imagine it today. It will be far stupider and more absurd than we can grasp right now.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Next you're gonna tell me there are no solo equipment osp infiltration missions like in Metal Gear Solid

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    cod black ops 2

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It was set in 2025

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Artillery will lose relevance, swarms of autonomous killer drones will detect and obliterate any undefended or lightly defended position within the first shot.
    The need to have laser defense against drones and the ease to kill artillery will push armored groups to clump together around anti-drone CIWS. But massed dual use AFVs will also act as pseudo-artillery, no idea of the balance.
    Unsupported infantry is dead.
    A battle will resemble more a pair of beehives having a rave with fireworks than anything we have ever seen.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >autonomous killer drones will detect and obliterate any undefended or lightly defended position within the first shot.
      Lasers, automatic air burst cannons and webbing already counters that.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >autonomous killer drones
      No nation in their right mind would use autonomous killer drones. The risk of friendly fire is through the roof as well as killing civilians. They are a PR nightmare. US doctrine always has a person in the loop before a button is ever pressed because of these reasons.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >No nation in their right mind would use autonomous killer drones.
        There isn't going to be any choice, and the risks can be better contained then you're saying. But the former is what will matter.
        >The risk of friendly fire is through the roof as well as killing civilians.
        IFF along with strict geofencing for full autonomous operation is very doable and very reliable, as is finer grained rules like "full auto in this area, full auto but only for flying drones in this bigger area". Full auto mode can be set specifically for the front. There are no civilians in the dozen or so miles of trench networks and artillery blasting everything that moves to shit, and if there are well they're highly likely to get blasted anyway. And in all cases soldiers themselves can absolutely have full IFF with an optical or very high freq component that's unjammable. Friendly fire will be less of a risk then right now.
        >They are a PR nightmare. US doctrine always has a person in the loop before a button is ever pressed because of these reasons.
        This only works with overwhelming tech superiority such that you don't really need them. If two even vaguely peer sides have drones fighting, mass jamming is deployed, and one requires humans in the loop while the other doesn't, the one with humans in the loop is going to lose. Badly. The reaction time is too fricking slow, all their drones are going to die and then their troops and units as well.

        Nuclear non-proliferation works for a bunch of practical as well as game theory reasons. AI non-proliferation will not work. The tech is too easy, too cheap, too readily available, and too effective. It can only be countered with opposing AI. Definitely, I expect the US to put a lot of work into making their AI better and avoiding friendly and civilian deaths, but there is no way we're keeping a human in the loop as a hard and fast rule. We won't have the luxury. It's war.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >The risk of friendly fire is through the roof as well as killing civilians.
        How 155mm HE does know how to not kill friendlies or civilians?

        >US doctrine
        Russians, Chinese and Iranians doesn't care about US doctrine.
        >killer robots go brrrrrrrrt

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >No nation in their right mind
        That's very anti-semitic of you

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Euphemistically described as a ‘fire-and-forget’ weapon, the Israeli Aerospace Industries’ Harop autonomously attacks any target meeting previously identified criteria, but includes a ‘man-in-the-loop’ feature that allows a human to technically prevent an attack from taking place.

          >Xtend has built a human-guided autonomous operating system

          They use AI for flight and sighting but are still fired and operated by soldiers. Just some basic googling will tell you this ahmed.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Oh, if a israelite said so, who are we goyim to question it.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Do you have reading difficulties? The very sentence you quoted moron:
            >but includes a ‘man-in-the-loop’ feature that allows a human to technically prevent an attack from taking place.
            >to technically PREVENT an attack
            ie, it's just window dressing. It's not "human deciding to shoot" it's "human could, in theory, totally prevent it from doing so ;^)". That's not the same thing, that's the obvious evolution and choice for a fully autonomous kill system. OBVIOUSLY everyone will put in failsafes and overrides.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              You're fricking moronic.

              They are just drones and remote guns that use AI to help with targeting. Probably for stabilization and the like or making them easier to fly.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            https://i.imgur.com/vd7zlmC.png

            >No nation in their right mind
            That's very anti-semitic of you

            >jews use drones or remote controlled guns
            >it's dehumanizing! It's a war crime!

            US tanks technically us AI to help target shit with the main cannon and remote .50. You're just buying into the hamas propaganda.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >quoting israelites is actually buying into the hamas propaganda
              8/10 chutzpah
              3/10 pilpul
              Result: unconvinced goy

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >the Israeli Aerospace Industries’ Harop AUTONOMOUSLY attacks any target meeting previously identified criteria
            >it's NOT AUTONOMOUS because we can abort the attack
            rabbinical levels of pilpul

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      DRONES! DRONES! DRONES!
      If this was the 20s, you'd be screaming that the battlefields of the future would be ones of self-maintainig tanks. Frick off.
      >verification not required

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      A terrain following swarm cannot be defeated by laser defense.
      There will be a swarm of a hundred drones flying one meter above the ground with perfect coordination. You will hear it and then have a couple of seconds to respond just as they crest a hill. Your laser will down five of them and then your vehicle and every single human in the vicinity will get blown up.
      The cost of this swarm with a hundred drones was $30 000 made in china.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No. Those drones will be detected first by other drones, and the laser defenses will position for maximum stand-off.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Wowee, a game made over a decade ago failed to predict the scale of drone deployment in high-intensity state-on-state warfare

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >artillery (even old artillery) shits all over everything, it's a real challenge to even get armor to the front before it's blown up by drones/artillery
    Black person this only works because neither side has an air force by any modern measure. No, the Russians chugging missiles from Volgograd is not air power by any measure, except maybe in Africa. How long do you think those old ass howitzers would last against the US Air Force? Ivan would try to shoot and scoot with a Hellfire up his ass. Vatniks somehow made themselves drink their own Kool Aid and think Ukraine is a modern army. It has bits and pieces of a modern army, but it's ultimately a second world force.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >implying you can send foot patrolls to recon if other side has air dominance

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      War in Ukraine is really a strange outlier to observe, because while it sure is a showcase for some things that will change warfare permanently, the absolute state of air warfare there skews it in a way that makes it unrepresentative of what a proper NATO vs. Russia war would look like.

      Drones *will* be a huge part of warfare going forwards, probably in ways that we can’t even imagine yet, and that’s something that has never been seen before. Yet the war hinges on artillery meatgrinding that demands insane amounts of shells, because the extremely limited amount of precision munitions and air assets make busting fortifications harder than it would be in an ideal modern warfare scenario. Feels like a schizo mashup of future and WWI. And lots of observers seem to make rather hasty conclusions on the future of warfare in general despite that.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I think the future for ground forces is fairly obvious despite this:
        Waves of low-altitude fixed-wing kamikaze drones are used to find and attack enemy artillery and logistics.
        They're supported by precision rocket artillery to bust fortifications and clumped up units.
        They're opposed by interceptor drones.

        Once a critical mass of enemy has been suppressed to a level they can't spam ATGMs/drones to get past APS, recognizable mech-infantry with attached tanks and engineers moves up to sweep buildings, secure logistical nodes, and take geographic features. Every IFV doubles as an anti-drone gun.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Every IFV doubles as an anti-drone gun.
          And every other IFV instead of infantry carries loads of those pesky quadcopters. And itis those quadcopters who sweep bindings and trenches first.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        WW1 was peak conventional war not even chemical weapons were used in 2.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      drones r like local air warfare
      basically
      drones r like local knowledge
      drone better than jdam and maverick and hellfire
      i WILL use drones for targeting and destroying enemy tanks and convoys with ground with himars and brimstones
      cheaper better and crowdsourced

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >this only works because neither side has an air force by any modern measure
      By that standard nobody does.
      Outside of a Day 1 Desert Storm air raid there's no fricking chance a western country that's not the US can fight a Russia analogue by shitting all over artillery with aircraft.
      Oh, you're coming for my artillery? Frick you, SAMbush. I told my crews not to be morons and that was enough to evade your dollar store SEAD. They only turned on the radar at the last minute, now you're gonna have to explain to concerned parents why their sons are getting the mobik correction procedure by Chechens.
      Oh you cleared my artillery tubes? Feel free to start breaching my minefields, they're so vulnerable... Frick you, shoot and scoot with rocket artillery. Your engineering units are tucking tail and running away and your aircraft weren't able to respond.
      And if the two sides have a modern airforce by said "modern measure"? BVR will make the use of aircraft against artillery impossible. The only way air power would win is by nailing the first day. Destroying the defenses before they disperse, targeting long range early warning and bombing the enemy aircraft while they're on the ground so you'll never have to fight them in the air.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Oh, you're coming for my artillery? Frick you, SAMbush. I told my crews not to be morons and that was enough to evade your dollar store SEAD.
        if it were that easy the serbians would've scored hundreds of kills, but guess what, they didn't.
        russia was getting hammered by HARMs constantly the past summer against a country that had barely any serviceable planes left, the idea that somehow they'd be able to pull ambushes against europe (who, unlike ukraine, has lots of F35s they wouldn't be able to see even if their radars were turned on) is idiotic and ignorant of the reality we've been witnessing for the past 2 years.

        >Oh you cleared my artillery tubes? Feel free to start breaching my minefields, they're so vulnerable... Frick you, shoot and scoot with rocket artillery.
        developed nations have counter-artillery radars and CIWS.
        breaching a minefield is not easy but it's doable with adequate resources.
        if your country has no resources to spare it's a move you will attempt once and then just give up (as shown by the non existent counteroffensive by ukraine last year)

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >drones
    >drones
    >dones

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You forgot

    >Russia is militarily competent
    >Russia and America join forces to stop the Poles before they anger the Ayyyys into killing us all

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Russia isn't in contact, and isn't in CSAT either. The guys that show up in that DLC are from Belarus.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Russian SF show up at the very end of contact to save the day because Tuguska was actually the Soviets poking another alien root and blowing up half of Siberia by accident

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Actually the Russians in Contact are Spetnaz and come from Kaliningrad which borders Livonia

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          i am still butthurt czechs failed to give option of fricking russia, no matter consequences. . Its better to blow up the entire eastern europe than to allow russkies free acces to this tech.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Drones are gay and not fun. Warzone banned bomb drone for that reason.
    Way Arma 3 portraits combat is about fun and balance. Brave soldiers running around on the ground with their toy rifles and doing brave things. Drone spam is unfun.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/K6ofLKv.jpeg

      drones r like local air warfare
      basically
      drones r like local knowledge
      drone better than jdam and maverick and hellfire
      i WILL use drones for targeting and destroying enemy tanks and convoys with ground with himars and brimstones
      cheaper better and crowdsourced

      >Arma 3 main campaign
      >set in 2035
      >1 (one) use of a quadrocopter drone in combat
      arma made us believe infantry, mbts, and SAMs could shoot down our precious quadcopter on sight within seconds.
      that was some absolute bullshit as proven by real life.

  10. 1 month ago
    Yukari

    the community reacted extremely badly to any sort of "future tech" when the game first came out
    you have to understand the ArmA community is highly autistic and just wants their 1990s-early 2000s scenario (ArmA 2) over and over again. No real innovation, no change, just comfortable stuff they already know.
    So it took several years into the game's lifespan (around 2016ish) before drones became a major thing. Even basic stuff like Datalink or long range AA systems didn't show up until around 2017.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      luv me SOVLful 90s
      'ate me SOULLESS 2000s and 2010s

      Simple as (2000-2004 US Army is an acceptable compromise)

      • 1 month ago
        Yukari

        shill your unit elsewhere mr potato computer

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          No

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      How did you go with your most recent coronary artery bypass graft Yukari? Still 500lbs

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      A3 made no attempt to portray any sort of near-future warfare and just made ugly as frick aesthetic choices with the guns and hex patterns everywhere. The fricking OPFOR attack helicopter had you looking through a smudged telescopic sight like it was the 1980s initially.
      The engine is complete ass for everything that isn't light infantry ops, so they should have stuck with what they know

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        This, NATO's future tank is literally a Merkava Mk IV from the 1990s.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/LAGS8ng.jpeg

        the community reacted extremely badly to any sort of "future tech" when the game first came out
        you have to understand the ArmA community is highly autistic and just wants their 1990s-early 2000s scenario (ArmA 2) over and over again. No real innovation, no change, just comfortable stuff they already know.
        So it took several years into the game's lifespan (around 2016ish) before drones became a major thing. Even basic stuff like Datalink or long range AA systems didn't show up until around 2017.

        The most absurd shit about it was definitely
        >the US will adopt stealthified versions of the F-18 amd fricking A-10 but no F-35s around

        featuring the Comanche was at least based

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          They didn't have the rights to show most of these real systems minus the Gripen. Hence why there were so few real guns and most were sci-fi designs.
          There are free mods for what you're asking for.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Oh shut the frick up. So they got the rights for arma 1 and 2, but not for 3? Where does that appear in the credits? The only thing they got permission for was the Acog, and youll recall Trijicon branding being on every splash screen in operation arrowhead. Black folk always use "muh licensing" to explain devs artistic choices, it was specious reasoning before the AM humvee suit and its just bullshit after that case set the legal precedent that games can depict what they want as long as its not branded.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            arma 3 is still a game meant to be fun and entertaining, using a drone to do most of these tasks while you sit your virtual ass down in the middle of nowhere would be a very boring experience.

            that's not how it works, as proven by the fact that there's lots of DLCs featuring real life equipment of all sorts.
            what you cannot do is use trademarks, for example you can model an F35 but can't put any lockheed martin logos or names anywhere

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >A3 made no attempt to portray any sort of near-future warfare and just made ugly as frick aesthetic choices with the guns and hex patterns everywhere.
        The games art design looks fine, but I'm with you all the way on the game mechanically not depicting the future at all. With any game franchise installment that is suddenly set in the future, you have to ask what was gained by setting it in the future, what is now possible that could not be plausibly depicted in a contemporary or historic setting? With blackops 2 (which came out a year before arma 3), you can say; well now we can have fusion vision and and wingsuits and switchblade killstreaks and armed BigDogs; all of which is technology that was around in 2012. With arma 3, you cant say any of that, in fact it doesn't even depict technology at a 2013 level, where both the depleted Nato and the space age Iranians only had green gen2 NVGs for the first 5 years after release, in the year 2035. I get they wanted to be conservative and not put in scifi shit like cloaking devices or anime mechs, but they were so conservative in the technology that the game may as well have been set in the 90s.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >the community reacted extremely badly to any sort of "future tech" when the game first came out
      >you have to understand the ArmA community is highly autistic and just wants their 1990s-early 2000s scenario (ArmA 2) over and over again. No real innovation, no change, just comfortable stuff they already know.
      Yeah? The fact is that that war has already become and will continue to rapidly further get more hostile to humans at the levels most players want to play at. Individual skill and practice in traditional shooting is going to become obsolete, the sides will be completely unfair, the pace will become ever faster and beyond human capability. Realistic war just isn't going to be very fun except in RTS style.

      You see the exact same thing in space war, and for much, much longer, in fact for nearly all of scifi history. The only relatively kinda realistic space war game is Children of a Dead Earth and it's for autists (and I like it). There was a very small window where humans might have played a real role in space war, in an alternate worldline from 1970ish to the mid-1990s or early 00s maybe. Human meat bodies have no place in any serious developed space war though unless there is magic. This is not what the vast super majority of normal players want though. They want their fantasy space dog fighting and magic engines for both STL and FTL and so on.

      Serious what do you expect? They're games, not work, not real war where it's all about winning.

      • 1 month ago
        Yukari

        you can have 2020s era tech and scenarios which are fun and engaging for the players, the problem is that it's outside the box thinking which requires counters, balancing and unorthodox mission design
        which of course no one wants to invest the time into

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah you can make 2010s stuff work, but it'll start needing to get a bit contrived, and at some point really what's the point? Is it actually making the game better? Dunno, I only played for a little while, I can appreciate some of what it does but it's not a game for me. Which makes me not an ongoing customer and thus my opinion is worthless to them lol. I don't really blame the playerbase either though, I like niche far future shit all over the soft/hard scifi scale from supcom to coade but it doesn't surprise me 99% of people do not.
          >which of course no one wants to invest the time into
          I mean, they're a business not a charity. Would it in fact be worth it?

          Another totally different thing that just occurred to me, that is purely technical: a lot of cutting edge stuff is just flat out classified in the details. You can get detailed specs and UI and so on for old aircraft. You can take tours and actually sit in them. You can buy the guns and shoot them and model them yourself. You can't just buy off the shelf that new NGSW smart scope or IVAS.

          For a fun more arcade-y game whatever they can just use press releases, but if a game wants to really seriously depict stuff I imagine that's actually a pretty challenging issue. Older tech is just going to be easier to uniformly do realistically. Not that that excuses shitty optics or comms or whatever but it's going to be for the F-35.

          • 1 month ago
            Yukari

            The players aren't a business or a charity. They want variety, and mission makers in units have the ability to balance modern equipment in different ways. I've butted heads with more unit leaders than I care to remember over this very issue. One of the most popular groups in the community recently started doing semi-modern ops with NVGs and optics, because as it turns out you can't re-run the same Cold War scenarios ad infinitum and keep your players.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >They want variety
              >because as it turns out you can't re-run the same Cold War scenarios ad infinitum and keep your players.
              You, literally <3 hours ago:

              https://i.imgur.com/LAGS8ng.jpeg

              the community reacted extremely badly to any sort of "future tech" when the game first came out
              you have to understand the ArmA community is highly autistic and just wants their 1990s-early 2000s scenario (ArmA 2) over and over again. No real innovation, no change, just comfortable stuff they already know.
              So it took several years into the game's lifespan (around 2016ish) before drones became a major thing. Even basic stuff like Datalink or long range AA systems didn't show up until around 2017.

              >you have to understand the ArmA community is highly autistic and just wants their 1990s-early 2000s scenario (ArmA 2) over and over again
              So which is it you stupid shit? You've just made literally diametrically opposed statements in the same fricking thread and response chain.

              If players do want it and will pay for it, the company will eventually respond if they can. If not they won't. What's your problem?

              • 1 month ago
                Yukari

                I'm not talking about the company you autistic mongoloid I'm talking about the PLAYERS. The company can do what it wants, but when it comes to mods and missions that people make for their groups the community leadership in many groups don't want anything too radically different from what they've been used to.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, you said directly opposing things about the PLAYERS into two consecutive posts you absolute fricking moron. And now you're doing it again!
                >but when it comes to mods and missions that people make for their groups the community leadership in many groups don't want anything too radically different from what they've been used to.
                How are "the community leadership" not "players" and not reflective of the players, or else they wouldn't be "community leadership"? You started by saying players didn't want change and modern. Then you turned around and said, no they definitely want change and modern. Now it's back again. Frick you.

                I've never really understood the shit you get in /hg/ but holy frick man is it starting to become clearer now.

              • 1 month ago
                Yukari

                I'm not going to babysit you and explain the difference between unit leaders and the actual playerbase, good day you gifted individual

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                lol is this what being morbidly obese does to the brain?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          most fun I had was a 2025 Takistan mod. mixed vanilla, operation arrowhead, and aegis assets with 2025 era CSAT

          >ACHs
          >SCAR-Ls
          >MX as DMR
          >UCP delta mixed with OCPs
          >Compound clearing and convoys on Uzbin Valley

          Scenario was NATO pull out from Takistan fighting against loyalist insurgents. Hand off to CSAT aligned Iranian forces goes wrong after a surprise coup by secularist Chinese backed forces against IRGC. US was in a recession and cut military budget so IRGC forces had air dominance. Had to go recover and exfiltrate shot down pilots and then deliver them to CIA backed local tribal forces, then a combined arms attack with secular CSAT against an IRGC airfield. Most fun I've ever had in a videogame

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            What’s the name of the mod?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Definitely pre-00s. CoaDE is closer to 70s-80s with a lot of tech underdevelopment in some ways.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Definitely pre-00s.
          Eh, computers (let alone AI) weren't quite there yet. I think infantry would already be done in space, but there'd still be humans having to be on any serious ships (albeit with as much automation as possible). I think if we imagine an alternate future where USSR had less moronic leadership and was actually relatively healthy, Space Race was on big time, JFK not assassinated, Korean War ended quick, no Vietnam War, and we took the Cold War to space, nuclear drives, and let it go hot there with agreement that nobody would trigger MAD by aiming at Earth (modification to the outer space treaty where US and USSR still banned weapons in orbit, but not beyond orbit), 00s would see humans being phased out more and more but still part of the battlespace. Stuff like 00s versions of loyal wingmen/loyal pointman, other stuff doing the direct fighting but a human command ship still close because speed of light limit means can't just remote operate a battle in the asteroid belt from Earth.

          Whereas at this point if we see space war it'll just be pure AI or at most (with super future tech) uploaded transhumans running solid state. But I don't think 00s would be at that level.
          >CoaDE is closer to 70s-80s with a lot of tech underdevelopment in some ways.
          It's a little more of a mix maybe but still good point that even that stays with more comprehensible stuff then AI swarm mines or something.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Computers
            Sparrows and Sidewinders have better guidance complexity than the missile systems available in CoaDE. Yes, we get APN guidance but no multi-spectrality of the imager (ex: UV+IR) for flare rejection/spectrum cut filtering or mass-aimpoint bias.

            It definitely is a more primitiveness version of 70s-80s ideas.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              That can be explained to a degree by the fact that the high tech centers on earth are all destroyed and what we have left are what ISRU can produce in space with whatever was available at the time. Material science can be more advanced but the population of humans and proportionally specialists who can make advanced hardware is a small fraction of what existed on earth.

              Or that the dev doesn't have the time to implement multi spectrum guidance on top of all the other shit he implemented.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Fully autonomous kamikaze drones like LOCAAS were a 1990s technology.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You people are such dopey fricks.
        See my other

        DRONES! DRONES! DRONES!
        If this was the 20s, you'd be screaming that the battlefields of the future would be ones of self-maintainig tanks. Frick off.
        >verification not required

        comment. Absolutely unbearable, you just keep spitballing nonsense as Gospel. "Warfare is just going to be my terminator swarms! No, mine!"

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You have zero counter responses just cope and seethe. By all means though feel free to wait and find out lol.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I believe in EW systems, dipstick

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Nigg3r are you living in a cave? The tech for hunter killer drones is already there. In fact, I bet we will see hunter killer drones being used en masse in this war as some sort of area denial weapon to the enemy’s rear to reduce friendly fire risk.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >ew
              >doing anything vs ai
              holy shit you moron ew is itself one of the drivers towards ai not a counter

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                All AI in drones does is return to sender when they get disconnected because of EW. They aren't used as fricking killbots because of both humanitarian and friendly fire concerns.

                US doctrines forces a human to be in the kill loop anyways. AI kill drones are a fantasy. It just takes one FF incident or civilian death to be a PR nightmare.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >AI kill drones are a fantasy.
                They are already exist see Bonus round and similar, also Brimstone.

                >It just takes one FF incident or civilian death to be a PR nightmare.
                Hamas deliberately killed 700 civilians on October 7. They terror launched missiles into civilian areas for years. in Where is yours "PR nightmare"? You still cheering "Free Palestine!"
                PR nightmare only applies to US. 3rd worlders would be happy to send killbots to kill your civilians and everyone would be applauding their brave achievements.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not cheering for palestine at all. They killed 1200 innocent civilians including 35 US citizens, took hundreds hostage, and have launched tens of thousands of rockets against civilian populations in an attempt to commit genocide. They dress in civilian clothing to blend in, use human shields, set up military operations in civilian infrastructure, and use child soldiers. They then proceed to cry victim and that "35k totally civilians and not armed combatants" were killed. Palestine is a terrorist state that should eat a dick. 70% of the Palestine population doesn't think the october 7th attacks were terrorist attacks and they fully support Hamas and their tactics.

                Dropping a bomb on a military target and getting civilian casualties is different than unleashing a swarm of killbots that kill indiscriminately. There's no guarantee they would even take out their intended military targets. They just kill whatever moves. As opposed to a bomb that (should be) called out by human intelligence to insure that it's a military target.

                And what happens if you lose contact with your kill drones because of EW and need to enter the area? You now have to contend with your own killbots.

                >An AI can easily identify, track a human, and attack it.
                The step from a phone app identifying objects indoors in good lighting to one identifying people far away and attacking them is huge. Try downloading one of those apps and have your friend stand in front of a tree 50 meters away with not his entire body visible and watch it fail.
                Image processing has been a thing for decades.
                The kind of AI people talk about where it makes actual decisions guiding itself to a target and hunting it down is science fiction.
                I already mentioned image recognition as an actually useful thing
                >The stage we're at right now is where processing power on small chips has just gotten good enough to where image recognition can be effectively done on smaller dedicated machines.

                Not all AI is the same, it's a term that's way too broadly used for any computer doing anything these days.

                Drones are really good at tracking things. There are lots of people using their own code to track shit on youtube. Add in thermal cameras and the like and you can track shit even better.
                >makes actual decisions guiding itself to a target and hunting it down is science fiction.
                It's really not. Again, there are videos of people with drones that follow them around. If a missile can track another missile going mach 10 and collide with it then they can make a drone that can chase down a person and smash into them. Just put in an infrasensor to have it detonate at the right distance.

                Someone even made an app recently that can track sign language and convert it to text.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >And what happens if you lose contact with your kill drones because of EW and need to enter the area?
                Again think of terms of artillery Do you enter area when artillery pounds it? Nope you wait when its over.
                Send killbots into designated kill area, they have order to attack whatever targets and then self destruct after certain time. Or return back if they are recoverable, of course on the way back they turn off attack mode, also if they cant estimate their position with required reliability they self destruct too.
                https://web.archive.org/web/20070216052031/https://defense-update.com/products/l/locaas.htm

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Imagine calling in danger close missions with kill drones. Basically duck and hide for 30 minutes while a swarm of drones covers the area.

                You could probably have some kind of IFF but your drones become useless if the enemy can spoof it. Or your enemy starts wearing ponchos or trashcans to hide their human figure from the AI.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Guys, you don't "call in a danger close drone strike", you tell the dude with the ipad five feet from you to do it.
                So imagine your one command drone and a back-pack of 25 or so mini-drones with as much explosives as a small grenade, you use your command drone to spot an enemy trench line, it uses the AI to tell you how many targets are there, you select which targets are valid, which are not, and then you click "go".
                And then, in an instant, the entire drone swarm buzzes into life, striking the enemy simultaneously, or striking one by one to allow the AI to observe effect on target.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                And you're wired to all these drones I presume, right? Because if not then EW makes them all unable to communicate with one another in the first place. Your "command drone" would have to be wired to all 25 smaller drones in order for this to work before setting them all loose.

                You're using AI in the first place because of EW.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You could have all of the drones be physically wired to the backpack serving as a data-server, command drone spots the terrain and gives target ID to the kill drones. You're also vastly overestimating the effectiveness of electronic warfare at scale.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                China and Russia both have EW that shuts down drones, GPS, and communications. Russia lacks the physical equipment to do it wide scale but china certainly will be able to.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                To explain electronic warfare; you beam frequencies with high energy, such that your jamming signal overpowers the receiving signal. How do you combat this? By switching frequencies you're communicating on. How do you combat frequency switching? By having a larger jamming frequency range.
                Of course, none of this works if your signal isn't strong enough to overpower the receiving signal, so you would either have to use directional jamming, or you're going to have to shit out frequencies in every direction.
                So you have two trench lines on opposite sides of a field, you fly your drones out and the enemy starts jamming.
                Now, the drones are jammed, but there's a problem; those drones are now all triangulating the exact position of the jamming signal.
                So you hardwire some basic memory logic of "go back to point where there was reception", you shoot the info back to your operators and they call in an artillery strike on your EW system.
                In a small scale battlefield, EW can still be very useful, but now imagine you're trying to jam a front-line that's hundreds of kilometers in length. If you jam before the drone swarms come, you're exposing your positions and jamming your own equipment for literally no gain.
                Take for example the Blyatmobiles or Turtle Tanks Russia is so fond of. They take a T-72, put a cage around it and jam it pack full of electronic warfare systems. So the Turtle Tank leads an armored assault and protects the rest from drones.
                Now imagine you could spot that Turtle Tank from beyond it's jamming capability with your command drone, you highlight it on your ipad and send in the kill drones and boom, no more Blyatmobile.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The TL;DR of this is that EW isn't going to defeat the drone threat, only mitigate it, and that having AI-powered kill drones does not necessarily imply not having a human in the loop.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                GPS and Drone jammers are small enough to be handheld. You don't need to have them on 24/7, just when you know drones are in the area. Either from scouts or radar. Using artillery to take out a jammer when it's a target smaller than a person you might as well just use that artillery to take out the target the drones were trying to take out in the first place. There are direction and omni direction jammers but even if you triangulate it's location, it's not going to be exact and won't be anymore accurate than "its over where the enemy is."

                Anti-radiation seeking missiles cost like $300,000 and I don't even know if they can target a drone jammer. Jammers only cost a few thousand and are small enough for a single soldier to carry. You could give each squad their own jammer so you would be dealing with thousands of the things on the battlefield. The US and China can field them but Russia can't. Russia can't even afford new rifles.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You could probably apply the same tech to thermals if it's hard to see in a forest or if they are using camo.

                https://i.imgur.com/ynwgURL.jpeg

                >AI kill drones are a fantasy.
                Swarm of these will be literally reality inside a decade.
                >It just takes one FF incident or civilian death to be a PR nightmare
                If you havent noticed, world is in a downtrend - communism, degeneracy, israelites and various shades of Black folk are all prevalent - and only white people have culture that cares about killing civilians, nobody else gives a frick.
                Wtf do you think happens when whites are gone/marginalized?

                You are just so wrong dude, it does not take a genius to see the obvious trends and incentives.

                The UN is calling for measures against AI killer drones. The US and other big players are against it though. Which doesn't make sense, since the US always has a human in the kill loop and wouldn't use AI drones as it goes against their current doctrine.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The UN is calling for measures against AI killer drones

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Dropping a bomb on a military target and getting civilian casualties is different than unleashing a swarm of killbots that kill indiscriminately. There's no guarantee they would even take out their intended military targets. They just kill whatever moves. As opposed to a bomb that (should be) called out by human intelligence to insure that it's a military target.
                >And what happens if you lose contact with your kill drones because of EW and need to enter the area? You now have to contend with your own killbots
                You clearly have no tech understanding nor military understanding.
                Artillery has existed forever to thin out the enemy without a guarantee that intended target is hit and hits indiscrimently.
                Also, friendly iff tags is fairly trivial as are killcommands for drones (no they wont be hacked), there wont be ever be a friendly drone fire incident realistically.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Artillery has existed forever to thin out the enemy without a guarantee that intended target is hit and hits indiscrimently.
                Artillery is aimed at military targets with pretty good precision. They don't just shoot artillery at populated centers or carpet bomb populated centers anymore. This isn't ww1.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >They don't just shoot artillery at populated centers or carpet bomb populated centers anymore.
                Post Mariupol.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                because russia is great at PR or giving a shit about anything fricking ever.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The US has stopped shelling cities and dropping bombs indiscriminately for 50 years now. They didn't spend all those years making JDAMs and laser guided weapons for no reason. Making a weapon that can't determine a combatant from a civilian is fricking moronic. The US catches shit for every civie they kill, even when using precision guided munitions.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >AI kill drones are a fantasy.
                Swarm of these will be literally reality inside a decade.
                >It just takes one FF incident or civilian death to be a PR nightmare
                If you havent noticed, world is in a downtrend - communism, degeneracy, israelites and various shades of Black folk are all prevalent - and only white people have culture that cares about killing civilians, nobody else gives a frick.
                Wtf do you think happens when whites are gone/marginalized?

                You are just so wrong dude, it does not take a genius to see the obvious trends and incentives.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not saying the tech isn't there because it clearly is. It's just friendly fire and civilian casualties make them too big of a risk.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >All AI in drones does is return to sender when they get disconnected because of EW.
                Those aren't AI drones, and we're not talking about what's in (known) use right now but the obvious, OBVIOUS way things are going.
                >They aren't used as fricking killbots because of both humanitarian and friendly fire concerns.
                No humanitarian and friendly fire concerns play absolute zero role you fricking idiot. It's purely a matter of the tech ramp only barely beginning. And imagine saying that Russia or similar give a single flying frick about EITHER "humanitarian" OR "friendly fire" even with normal weapons.
                >US doctrines forces a human to be in the kill loop anyways.
                Only because the US isn't in any serious conflict at all, and feels confident in its superiority. For now. But if the other side is mass deploying them and you don't, you will lose unless you possess overwhelming conventional superiority.
                >AI kill drones are a fantasy. It just takes one FF incident or civilian death to be a PR nightmare.
                The fantasy homosexual is you. lmao at this make believe shit, next you're going to say the US won't firebomb entire cities, spread agent orange over forests (and more firebombing), use landmines, strike at hospitals, or whatever else we think is necessary. And I say this as an American who 100% unironically thinks that we are the good guys, and that under the circumstances those were all justified. What makes us better is at least trying to calibrate, and what we do AFTER winning. But when it comes to beating a monstrous enemy collateral damage has always been, and will always be, acceptable.

                We'll do our best to use auto killbots responsibly, but use them we will. And much of the rest of the planet will use them and NOT responsibly.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Not that anon but holy shit am I tired of you AI-dicksuckers. As soon as a technology becomes mainstream like AI has all the moronic homosexuals that have no idea how it actually works suddenly show up with dogshit opinions. This applies to both the AI haters and lovers btw.
                The stage we're at right now is where processing power on small chips has just gotten good enough to where image recognition can be effectively done on smaller dedicated machines. AI like you imagine it (Terminator, LLMs like chatgpt e.t.c.) requires MAGNITUDES more processing power and run on huge processing centers.
                "AI" does have uses in the military like detecting patterns and changes over time through observation complexes or even in guidance of drones/cruise missiles based on the terrain that's beneath them.
                The only application of """"AI"""" if you can even call it that on drones is point tracking and dynamic route changes based on weather, known enemy locations and EW conditions.
                Slaughterbots is FAR FAR FAR away from reality.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Slaughterbots is FAR FAR FAR away from reality.
                An AI can easily identify, track a human, and attack it. Tracking and identification software on phones is pretty common. They could probably even tell what the person is holding, whether it's an AK or Quran if the camera is good enough.

                The problem is that they aren't perfect and can't tell friend from foe or civilian. Letting one loose and having it come back at you is a very real possibility. You're just killing shit indiscriminately at that point and would be considered a war crime if you ended up killing civilians.

                There is a whole kill loop even when using shit like reaper drones to confirm targets. There is always a human determining whether something get's blown up or not.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The problem is that they aren't perfect and can't tell friend from foe or civilian. Letting one loose and having it come back at you is a very real possibility. You're just killing shit indiscriminately at that point and would be considered a war crime if you ended up killing civilians.
                Same when you fire MRLS salvo on the grid.

                Just think in terms of the artillery. There is no good guys in this grid. Unleash death.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >An AI can easily identify, track a human, and attack it.
                The step from a phone app identifying objects indoors in good lighting to one identifying people far away and attacking them is huge. Try downloading one of those apps and have your friend stand in front of a tree 50 meters away with not his entire body visible and watch it fail.
                Image processing has been a thing for decades.
                The kind of AI people talk about where it makes actual decisions guiding itself to a target and hunting it down is science fiction.
                I already mentioned image recognition as an actually useful thing
                >The stage we're at right now is where processing power on small chips has just gotten good enough to where image recognition can be effectively done on smaller dedicated machines.

                Not all AI is the same, it's a term that's way too broadly used for any computer doing anything these days.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The kind of AI people talk about where it makes actual decisions guiding itself to a target and hunting it down is science fict ... ACK!

                You lack media literacy.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >media literacy
                Even more moronic buzzwords.
                You seem to fit squarely into the bracket of people that use the term "AI" for "any computer doing anything these days".
                BONUS doesn't use AI, it uses powerful sensors and a purpose built circuit.
                Just like how the Javelin isn't AI even though it can steer itself to the target.
                >Drones are really good at tracking things. There are lots of people using their own code to track shit on youtube
                Again, this is just image recognition and basic code making it go towards where it sees something. It's just like how radars have had the ability to detect armored vehicles since ages ago. It's not a fricking slaughterbot with object permancence able to deduce that someone is behind a piece of cover.
                It's just a much cheaper PGM

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >basic code making it go towards where it sees something.
                That's all it fricking needs in order to work. Fly over the tree line, spot target using thermals, then fly towards said thing. Tech that has been posted ITT used by civilians. All you need to do is add a warhead to it and you've got an AI controlled kill bot. Any random pajeet using open source code can do this.

                The AI can determine whether it's a human or a deer. What it can't determine is whether or not it's friendly, civilian, or a combatant.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >goes behind any tiny bit of cover so you're not a clearly human shaped silhouette
                What now?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >if I go behind cover you can't shoot me
                really, no shit? You also can't shoot them. You are now suppressed and combat ineffective allowing the enemy to advance on your position.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >>goes behind any tiny bit of cover so you're not a clearly human shaped silhouette
                >What now?
                Fire an automatic mortar or grenade launcher at it. If whatever it is is hiding from your side they're clearly bad.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The stage we're at right now is where processing power on small chips has just gotten good enough to where image recognition can be effectively done on smaller dedicated machines. AI like you imagine it (Terminator, LLMs like chatgpt e.t.c.) requires MAGNITUDES more processing power and run on huge processing centers.

                You can gain orders of magnitudes better processing efficiency by using dedicated hardware instead of general purpose ones. The real question is when will someone stop sitting on the fence waiting for more algorithmic advances and actually invest in an ASIC design.

                Its engineering and budgets, not science and technology.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >t. complete fricking moron spewing about technology while knowing nothing about technology
                Imagine not knowing the fricking difference between TRAINING a model and RUNNING a model and then spouting about "have no idea how it actually works". Or model optimization. Literally smartphones run complex onboard LLMs and image recognition right fricking now. I've deployed AI recognizers under BlueIris I run on my own hardware for my own security camera system. Recognizing stuff is trivial at this point.

                If you're so fricking ignorant you didn't know this just shut the frick up anon.
                >Slaughterbots is FAR FAR FAR away from reality.
                lol no. The basic stuff has been demonstrated, smart turrets are already a thing. You can rig up a demo (without actually connecting it to a gun) with open source software right now.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Doesn't choade base the entire game around constellations of mini-satellites that can [magically] detect everything except [magically undetectable] enemy mini-satellites, in order to realize the creator's hardon for no stealth in space?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >XM7
      >modern weapon in 2009 despite it not existing
      have a nice day, fat sandBlack person. m81 best camo

      lol is this what being morbidly obese does to the brain?

      yeah. i was like that when i was a fatass. but at least i had the advantage of being white, which he will never be

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      i wanted arma 2 without the jank, better visuals, and more content/features.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >arma 2 without the jank, better visuals, and more content/features
        isn't that Squad?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Check out Arma Reforger. It's s MP only but it's really fun and a good preview of Arma 4.

        https://i.imgur.com/qsgY0ko.jpeg

        >arma 2 without the jank, better visuals, and more content/features
        isn't that Squad?

        Squad used to be great but it's total dogshit now. Play Reforger instead.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I've heard people hate reforger.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It had a very rocky launch and I've only just gotten into it recently myself and it's in a good place now. It's still got Arma jank but is a far better MP experience than previous Arma games.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Its annoying that they went back to the old a2 style editor. Eden was so easy to use, and half the point of reforger was to prime people for arma 4 and allow modders and mission makers to familiarize themselves with the newer engine, so to not port the editor is a huge misstep. Reforger would probably as active as A3 right now if they had made mission creation easier.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Harvest Red and Operation Arrowhead Campaigns in A2 were amazing. The British DLC mini campaign was pretty good too.

      Arma 3s campaign and it's DLC campaigns/missions were garbage. The main thing that makes Arma 3 worth playing is the massive amount of mods and custom missions/campaigns.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Filtered

  11. 1 month ago
    Indian shill

    >What will the actual 2035 war look like, as opposed to the nonsense the media fed us for the last 30 years?
    Basically drones and artillery will be the meta. WW1 style trench warfare will be back on the menu. What the french did in their Mali campaign will be how mechanised pushes might happen. So light armoured vehicles with atgm and drone buddies moving at high speed. Things like the EBRC jaguar will be the new meta. Swarm drones will also be mature enough to take out AD.
    Iron dome copies will become super common once the Iranians somehow get the designs for that.
    Anti drone laser weapons will become extremely common.
    5 th gen atgms with loal capabilities will be the new meta.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Ukraine war is going the way it is because neither side has much airpower or proper logistics. End of story

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >WW1 style trench warfare will be back on the menu
      Are you legitimately moronic

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    kino

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Shit
      >Decent
      >God tier
      >Liquid shit
      You know it's true.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >never again

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >>Arma 3
    that's as far as i got into your post, because arma 3 is gay future shit
    devs always get future shit wrong even when they're given the blueprint like ghost recon advanced warrior

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Arma 3 quadcopters are pretty slop, you need a dedicated backpack for them and can't just pocket them into your suit, had it been the case they would have been more common even in game.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >And so on, and so on ad infinitum. What will the actual 2035 war look like, as opposed to the nonsense the media fed us for the last 30 years?
    Tunnels.
    Only tunnels.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Arma 3 PVP multiplayer
    >circa 2015-2020
    >1 (one) quadrocopter with a good operator completely fricks the enemy team
    >the battlefield is completely transparent, everything gets instantly marked on the map by the quad operator
    >armor is a threat for the first minute after which it gets ambushed by ATGMs and guaranteed to be killed in 2 or 3 hits
    >meat wave tactics until the position is overwhelmed
    it was pretty realistic after all, the tools were all there

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    NATOids scared of future settings because US military prime was left far behind in 90's
    Literally obsolete army and doctrines

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      it's because they projected the future wrong cyka
      the only part they got half right was the tall tanks, but the only tall tanks we have today are retrofitted old stock, so they didn't even get that part right

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes yes, soon the T14s and SU57s will bomb the evil american imperialists or whatever.
      Any moment now

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >What will the actual 2035 war look like
    With the pace tech is moving it's genuinely hard to say and the threat of things really coming out of left field, ie, some huge breakthroughs and/or legal shifts in space weapons, nanotech, genomics, cybernetics, quantum computers, or stuff we're not even thinking of. The first in particular, that requires no breakthroughs at all, Starship already is the breakthrough. In 2035 in fact SpaceX will probably already be on the next version, and the US military will be able to launch hundreds of tons into LEO at a time for <$100/kg. How that gets utilized involves domestic politics and geopolitics as much as anything, not fancy new tech. At that pricing you really CAN do orbital kinetic strikes, a 10 ton KEW would only cost a million dollars in launch cost, or less, would be equilvalent in energy to a 160000 lb explosive bomb, and would be insanely hard to stop.

    But in terms of conventional stuff ever more AI is the obvious one. To the extent infantry still exist, it'll be with smart guns that help aim themselves, full HUD and so on. There will be massive use of ground drones not just air, including static AI turrets. In fact that's a likely evolution of "infantry": carting around and deploying/repositioning turrets. Drones will be at all sizes, from small things to air superiority, and will further revolutionize logistics. Both ground and air logistic drones capable of bringing constant resupplies wherever as directed will be a big boon.

    Ever better defense systems is the other big one, both lasers and AI directed regular guns. That'll be a big counter to a lot of existing stuff without mass volume, and might shift the balance on the naval side right back towards big ships with nuclear reactors.

    /k/ is going to mostly hate it honestly.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Problem with modern warfare in vidya is it usually fricks up any kind of balance, lowers the overall skill ceiling and just isn't fun. One guy using thermals in a game like Arma3/Tarkov basically means you're dead the instant he sees you through a bush. Throw in drones with thermals and stealth is impossible, removing an entire element out of the game. Throw in aimbot optics and self guided munitions and the ceiling hits the floor. Modern warfare doesn't transfer well to pvp games without taking liberties and removing all the cancerous shit.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >One guy using thermals in a game like Arma3/Tarkov basically means you're dead the instant he sees you through a bush.
      Which is very realistic, if one side has thermal/NV and the other doesn't then night becomes an absolute turkey shoot. It was such an overwhelming advantage for awhile for the US that I know US leadership actually started to get worried, normally technological edges don't last that long and when it inevitably wore off they thought a lot of skills and doctrine for even fighting will have rotted and have to be learned all over again.

      But as you say realism doesn't necessarily make for fun. Balance was easier in the past but will become more of a challenge down the road. Eventually there will be no human infantry left on the real world battlefield at all, and all FPS games will become scifi or historical.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Modern warfare doesn't transfer well to pvp games without taking liberties and removing all the cancerous shit.
      Doesn't transfer to 1 vs 1 PvP when one player controls one unit. Obviously no one wants to control weak unit that losses 1:50.

      But it can easily be transformed into assymetrical PvP. When players control several units and units power is balanced by their costs (and thefore numbers). Like in strategy games when you buy army with points before combat.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        There are a few practical challenges there though, some in terms of scenario design and restrictions that imposes. But the bigger one is that the ratios can still become so big that it still gets hard/unfun to even have enough people in an FPS design like ArmA. It's not an RTS where you can just have more stuff spawned and mass spam is a very reasonable counter to certain high value stuff. In an FPS it's basically 1:1 player to character, so to counter a 50:1 capability you'd need 50 humans on the other side and that's not really feasible.

        Improving AI might ultimately offer some help there, if bot players get so fricking good that they actually are effective NPCs that you can even talk with in real time and give orders to reasonably well then new game designs will become possible. That's a ways off but might happen this decade.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >In an FPS it's basically 1:1 player to character, so to counter a 50:1 capability you'd need 50 humans on the other side and that's not really feasible.
          FPS/RTS hybrid.
          Several attempts were made and they were not really good.
          But there is successful one: Mount and Blade 1 and 2.

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    OP is a homosexual, have you actually played the game? Infantry has a lightweight javelin that rapes everything on the ground and drones are used extensively.
    Also if you play WARLORDS which is a kind of large scale strategic PVP match using vanilla assets, vehicles are hard use because of infantry and there are new servers that have added suicide drones.

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You motherfricking zoomers are WORSE somehow than the goddamn boomers who thought counterterrorism was the military meta of the future.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Zoomers seethe at boomers because they see too much of their inner self. Their narcissistic egotism makes them reject self awareness of this.

      Gen X and Millennials will be the last generations that can use file systems and do IT work.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Gen X and Millennials will be the last generations that can use file systems and do IT work.
        This hits me in the feels.

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I use the de mining drone to fly around and kill people in arma 3

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Arma 3 will be accurate btw
    Drones will easily be countered within 10 years

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I've honestly found infantry with titan compacts to be the best way to delete armor in the game.

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I hope Arma 4 is set in modern day and is based on the Russian invasion of Ukraine but where NATO actually counter attacks against Russia. I don't want 1980s Cold War again and the fictional future setting for Arma 3 was gay.

  26. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >omg tiny fragile and relatively slow drones will dominate the battlefield!!!!

    t. someone whos only experience with modern war is the ukriane war.

  27. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I was disappointed by the “near future” aspect of Arma 3. Thank god a million mods were made for it so I didn’t have to play with all that cringe armor etc.

  28. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Shield will come back on the battlefield

  29. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >What will the actual 2035 war look like
    NATO/Russia/China vs Black folk/muslims insurgency war #15314351 in bumfrickistan(middle east shithole)/nowhere-ville (ex-belgian african colony shithole)

    repeat until we all run out of resources/money and you got a full blown nuclear holocaust reseting humanity to medieval level of population

  30. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ^
    JIDF damage control copemaxxing

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >quoting israelites is actually buying into the hamas propaganda
      8/10 chutzpah
      3/10 pilpul
      Result: unconvinced goy

      >the Israeli Aerospace Industries’ Harop AUTONOMOUSLY attacks any target meeting previously identified criteria
      >it's NOT AUTONOMOUS because we can abort the attack
      rabbinical levels of pilpul

      Do you have reading difficulties? The very sentence you quoted moron:
      >but includes a ‘man-in-the-loop’ feature that allows a human to technically prevent an attack from taking place.
      >to technically PREVENT an attack
      ie, it's just window dressing. It's not "human deciding to shoot" it's "human could, in theory, totally prevent it from doing so ;^)". That's not the same thing, that's the obvious evolution and choice for a fully autonomous kill system. OBVIOUSLY everyone will put in failsafes and overrides.

      lol these homosexuals don't know that the sidewinder is also considered autonomous since it doesn't require manual guidance to hit it's target and steers itself.

      The harpy is an anti-radiation missile. It's autonomous because it searches for radiation signals.

      They aren't using AI to shoot people you fricking moron.s

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >this other thing is also autonomous
        >so your thing isn't autonomous
        9/10 chutzpah
        1/10 pilpul
        Result: rising levels of nooticing among the goyim

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >doesn't understand what autonomous means
          You might be moronic ahmed.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >automatic target tracking is like automatically engaging
            >you don't understand what autonomous means
            Okay yithzak. Whatever yahweh's chosenites say. Please behead me last.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >missile gets launched
              >seeks radiation source
              >missile gets launched
              >seeks heat source
              English isn't your first language is it.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                US isn't your only citizenship, is it?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I dated a girl that lived in Mexico and another girl that was a polish immigrant. I had a thing for a Russian girl but we grew apart.

                I'm from german ancestry from both side of my parents. They came to America in the early 19th century. I'm not fully blonde (dirty blonde) but I do have blue eyes.

  31. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >if you have any idea how actual military systems and current technology works you're a JIDF shill
    The AI-homosexuals ITT will use AI, Image recognition and advanced general intelligence able to detect when someone is trying to hide interchangeably.
    Actual NPC mind-slaves

  32. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >CMMG gets the NATO contract
    It is meant to fantasy

  33. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Arma 3 is that mythical online community thats an inverse of warthunder while still huffing its own shit fumes under the guise of "realism". The game where Bradly IFV are virtually indestructible, and every one is a coping airforce furry. Insurgency was more realistic than arma 3 at this point

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Whatever you say frickass

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Your too moronic to create a server with features that were common in free mods from 2007. You're even too chickenshit to recognize basic things like spawn camping. Your average military rp server in gmod is more dynamic and reasonable than that. Congrats!

  34. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I imagine many future conflicts will be drone operating not only flying drones but UGVs and humanoid robots, with maybe a small amount of armed operators providing security for forward operating bases.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *