CWRIII - Resistance is one of the best Arma 3 campaigns I have played in terms of solo experience, and as someone who is a fan of the original game, this is more than nostalgic. Playing this campaign in a modernized version is always something that I hope to see in other games that remaster old content (whether by the game devs or mod makers).

I always appreciate the time and effort poured into making such content real and playable. In comparison to the CWRIII - Cold War Crisis campaign, Resistance is better in some ways. I have no intentions to sound harsh or neglect the work done by W0lle and the rest of the team involved with making the CWC campaign to begin with (and the CWRIII mod). I have played CWC, of course, and also enjoyed it, but it has a few more problems than I can recall.

With that being said, this topic was opened to provide feedback and suggestions.

Gameplay Problems

I can't ignore the fact that while playing the campaign, it still bares the general Arma 3 vanilla experience (despite the usage of mods) that pretty much breaks it. While the campaign runs almost smoothly, without any tasks not being completed, triggers not being activated or any of the sorts, my biggest problem is the AI.

As we all know, one of the pinnacle problems the Arma series is known for is the AI. As funny as it might sound, the original campaign played much better, from my experience. By "better", I mean that the AI was more consistent, more reliable, and could keep up more often than not. Sure, even CWA wasn't perfect in terms of AI, but in my opinion, BI has deteriorated the AI from one installment to another. Simply put: it doesn't matter what difficulty you play, the campaign progression can either be total amusement or total hell, especially on Veteran difficulty. The enemy can see you through foliage and fog, spot you without trouble (since it is communicating with telepathy), hit you with pinpoint accuracy even from long ranges, and friendly AI (especially when in vehicles) behaves erratically or just inconsistent when you want them to keep formation. Speaking of AT soldiers, your friendly AT guys miss most of the time, even at close ranges compared to the enemy (the same problem appears in W0lle's CWC campaign). I love challenges and played on Veteran for a while, but it was so unbearable that I had to change some difficulty settings.

The next problem would be the weather. Across all missions there is the same consistent weather of heavy overcast (it rains from time to time) and fog that covers too much of your view distance. In the beginning, I thought my view distance was too low, but eventually I figured it was the in-game weather that was set for missions. I guess all missions have the same weather settings, though the bottom line is that the constant fog (being the main problem) not only breaks the immersion, but basically makes it harder to play, especially because the AI has an advantage over you for not caring about the fog.

In addition, there are a few more problems I encountered, some of which are not really game breaking:

1) In the mission "Counerattack", at times it's very hard to complete it due to the gunships spotting you very quickly, especially if you roam for too long in open fields. In situations where you have no vehicle available to escape faster, I found myself reloading a save game every time to try and change my approach to the hiding location. Although in the original campaign the gunships can also spot you, they are not on the same level as in Arma 3.

2) If you destroy an enemy BMP-1 that happens to launch an ATGM at you, the missile can still "track" you and hit your vehicle. The 9M14 Malyutka is a wire-guided missile, and any kind of wire-guided weapon will lose trajectory if the gunner is killed (hence guiding the missile), which makes it illogical in-game. I'm pretty sure this problem is more related to the CWRIII mod, or even CUP Vehicles in that case, but I wanted to point this one out also.

3) In the "# Chapter II - War" cutscene, there's a segment near the end where US spec-op guys are planting explosives to ambush a Soviet convoy. Said segment has not appeared in the original campaign, since the first interaction with the Americans happens after the mission "Hostages".

4) There were many times when the enemy AI was holding its position and remained prone, making it hard to complete some of the missions, as you needed to move around and find them.

5) The final mission, "Fire Fight", doesn't appear in the Campaign's mission list in the main menu.

6) There are several cutscenes throughout the campaign where the camera angles are a bit off, and you see characters at the side of the screen instead of in front of you, or in a way that should appear more pleasant to the eye.

7) There are several missions (or rather something that could happen in general across all missions) where enemy soldiers are not holding their position in various locations, go prone, and remain there forever. On missions where this happened, I had to run around and search for them. Usually they were "stuck" in thick foliage where you couldn't see them until they opened fire at you (or your squad).

8) All the missions in the Campaign's list in the main menu are missing short intros.

9) In the last cutscene post-"Fire Fight", when Guba escapes with the helicopter, he wears a different set of uniforms compared to what he wears throughout the entire campaign.

10) The NVGs (PVS-7) are, for some reason, taking the slot of the binoculars. Meaning, you can't equip both at the same time. Also, if you equip the NVGs and press B, your character will still prompt the animation of pulling the binoculars out, but the animation cuts in the middle due to the lack of the item itself.

11) Although this was somewhat changed in later Arma titles, and as you may know, all officers (both NATO and Soviet) are wearing caps instead of helmets. While this is also seen in the CWC campaign, the point is that it wouldn't be realistic nor smart for an officer in combat duty to wear caps, whether these are barracks, patrol or dress caps. This also gives the officers less protection, obviously, therefore having them wearing helmets instead would look better.

Historical Accuracy

After covering all the problems I encountered, now I'd like to share my list of suggestions that are meant to improve the campaign/lore immersion level as a whole, starting with historical accuracy. Mind you, some of these items might be regarded as "nitpicking", as they tend to come from a place of keeping the story a bit more true-to-life rather than recreating BI's work 1:1. Should this list be taken into consideration, obviously it'll require doing some work on the small details. I believe there's more room for imagination, but then again, we can live without them.

1) Final cutscene post-"Fire Fight" mission:

1a. The NATO reinforcements arriving to Nogova include two Apache gunships that escort the Chinook and then attack the Soviet forces. The presence of the Apaches is inaccurate, as the Apache platform entered service with the US military only in 1986, whereas the campaign took place in 1982. Replacing them with the Cobras would be more accurate.

1b. There's a short segment showing American forces at the air base (with tanks, IFVs, helicopters, etc.). There's an M1A1 tank present there as well, but it is inaccurate. The A1 variant (with the 120mm gun) wasn't introduced until 1986. Replacing it with the basic M1 variant available in CWRIII (with the 105mm gun) would be more accurate.

1c. When James Gastovski is looking at the Soviet POWs, there's a HMMWV placed behind him. The presence of the HMMWV is inaccurate, as it only started being produced in 1983, around one year after the campaign took place. Unironically, in the original campaign there was an M151 instead of the HMMWV. Therefore, replacing it in this campaign as well will be more accurate. Alternatively, an FIA UAZ might also be suitable.

2) Portrayal of American soldiers

The US soldiers seeing throughout the campaign (including James Gastovski) are all equipped with uniforms and gear that are slightly anachronistic for a 1982 setting. Firstly, the CWRIII mod already features American units in a '82 configuration, therefore replacing them with the latter instead of the ones in the campaign (which are the '85 configuration, like in the CWC campaign) will be more accurate.

Secondly, to further explain some of the differences and inaccuracies:

2a. The US military hadn't fully issued the then-newer M81/BDUs, at least in not enough capacity to see combat duty. Although there was an early version of the M81 available, the ERDL uniforms were still more common at the time. I think using either the ERDL or the M81 (early version) will be more accurate, and maybe even mixing the two.

2b. The PASGT system (helmet and vest) began to be issued to the US military in 1983 and 1985 respectively. Before that, US troops were still using M1 helmets (with ERDL cover) and ALICE gear (without vests).

2c. Specifically regarding the spec-op troops, it wasn't common for them at the time to wear helmets even in combat duty. There are few segments in the campaign where these guys, including James Gastovski, are wearing a variety of headwear (balaclava, boonie hats and beanies), as well as the aforementioned PASGT helmets and even the PROTEC helmets. Keeping the headwear to anything but helmets will be more accurate, and I would argue that the presence of the PROTEC helmets is also not accurate, especially not with the NVG gear attached to the helmets.

2d. Regarding to American weapons, It'll be nice to see the spec-op guys also using XM117E2s and not just the MP5s, as American spec-ops at the time were seeing using both weapon systems together, although one would argue that in some in-game missions it wouldn't be smart to use MP5 in open field combat, as the 9mm obviously isn't as effective as the 5.56mm. Also, the presence of the M9 pistol is anachronistic, because the M9 began to be issued in 1985, whereas before that the M1911A1 was still the standard issue. Therefore, removing the M9 from gear pool and from the inventory in the mission "Contraband" will be more accurate.

3) Other Inaccuracies (not necessarily historical)

3a. The presence of the V-80 Kamov in all missions where it is seen. At the time during 1982 it was still being a prototype aircraft, so seeing it in action wouldn't be as realistic.

Immersive World Building

In the sense of "world building", I think one of the many things that could make the campaign look and feel better, is by simply cluttering the missions with more objects, camps/bases, AI and civilians in towns (but not too much that breaks the lore in any way). Since the campaign already serves as a remaster of the original one, which you took the liberty to add, improve and change numerous things in it already, then why not go even further and enhance the immersion by making Nogova more alive?

---

I would like to end my feedback here and once more mention how I appreciate the work you've behind the making of this campaign. I jump to it back and forth at times, but recently it made me want to play the originals ones again as well for the nostalgia.