Page MenuHomeFeedback Tracker

Allow rifles to be equipped in both the primary and secondary slot
Reviewed, WishlistPublic


It would be nice to allow the launcher slot to be used to hold a secondary weapon, not just a launcher. I.e. a special operations force having a SMG and a longer range rifle at the same time.
This would work like ACE2's weapons on back system, except that switching could be done from the "mouse-wheel menu" (don't know what it's called). The weapons would have a set mass, and carrying heavy weapons would fatigue the player. This system would be useful for missions where two different weapons are required, or for special operations/diving missions, whereby one could use the underwater rifle when diving then switch to a "normal" rifle on land, with the option to discard the underwater weapon (still able to be retrieved later).


Legacy ID
No Bug
Have Not Tried
Operating System
Windows 7

Event Timeline

There are a very large number of changes, so older changes are hidden. Show Older Changes

I want to be able to dual wield M9s.

sarlac added a subscriber: sarlac.May 7 2016, 12:50 PM

You've been overruled sarlac.

You are being excomunnicated for being too hard.

@DarkWanderer, additional proxy point and slot for weapon add more ways for mod makers :)!
SGTIce ;), dual wield with pistols be cool to as and with smg's ;)

Lets not get Halo up in here now Kol9yn.

We will see won't we... And the halo crap is exactly what talking about. Don't need to be dual wielding power armored douchesoldiers.

Seems you're getting your panties in a bunch over a joke/semi serious comment about pistols.

Have you not seen SWAT DUAL WIELDING M9s!!?!?!?!?

Nah, just making a point. And agreeing with you.

But have you seen the police dual wielding pistols, that's the important question.

Actually no i have never seen the police dual wield pistols. That is a ridiculous idea and a ridiculously ineffective way to handle a firearm that movies and criminals alike have emblazoned on the civilian publics' idea of gunbattles

I will vote this up because it makes sense. Weapons such as the Mk 32A1 are carried by grunts and they also carry an M4 or M16A4 as well for standard engagements when the grenade launcher isn't needed. Or Scout Snipers in the Marines typically carry something like the 40A5 M110 and depending on mission role also pack out a 107.

SGTIce added a comment.May 2 2013, 6:37 PM

Obviously Relovance, you didn't read through the comments & notice that was directed at Sarlac.

True, some soldier have an assault riffle on them and a SMG, MP7, P90 or MP5 for example, but also possible with a shotgun for close combat and still have an handgun, and if we are able to carry a big launcher i don't see the problem of having 2 weapon in our back and a gun in our holster, useful for sniper who can have a big sniper in the back and a SMG in case off or an assault riffle for middle range engagement.

And for information my custom loadout in some server who allow mods its a sniper M107 + a FAMAS, for close/medium range target i use the FAMAS and for long range the M107, i put one of them in my backpack bag (sadly its not realistic for the M107 who must always stay in our back) but i confirm that the weight is already influencing our fatigue.

SGTIce added a comment.Jun 6 2013, 9:51 PM

At max, there should only really be 2 weapons carried w/ the option for a pistol, unless you packed something light in a backpack.

boid added a subscriber: boid.May 7 2016, 12:50 PM
boid added a comment.Jun 6 2013, 10:09 PM

smells from hollywood here

put your second "primary" to your backpack ...

carry two primary weapons quickly accessible make no sense at all
if you put yourself i a situation where you would need such an option, you basicly did something very wrong

I agree. Two long-guns aren't that unrealistic. A lot of soldiers carry stockless breaching shotguns in addition to a primary carbine.

Boid, how about sharing with the class your vast experience.

Some example here of soldier who have several primary weapon : Grenade launcher + riffle same shotgun + riffle sniper + riffle

It this image they are soldier in REAL LIFE operation, not in training, no airsoft.
Look this video
If this guy will be stuck to use a single weapon at time he would have had been killed with all his team, of course we don't talk about using 2 weapon at time in 2 different direction, just have 2 on us, exactly like real life military do.

Just having the weapon in the backpack is way too boring and restrictive :
The time you need to put/take the gun in the backpack + the place it take mainly if we are medic or repair specialist + every time you change your primary gun you get the pistol in hand + its unrealistic + its boring.
Grenade launcher (flares gun and others), sniper riffle, rocket/missile launcher, SMG and other personal defense weapon, shotgun are all a good reason to lets people use 2 weapon slot, even for 2 riffle with a specialized one and a single purpose other.

boid added a comment.Jun 12 2013, 3:08 PM

If if read something like: "If this guy will be stuck to use a single weapon at time he would have had been killed with all his team .."

Then i dont want to share experience.

For sure there are examples around where soldiers carry two "main weapons", like an expertise scandinavian soldier did during the second world war.

But we have alot of things here that are feeded by missinformation:
"Main-weapon" or primary is the thing you point at enemys primarly.(time related)
Not as secondary weapons, that you use for secondary or special uses, like a grenade launcher or a pistol.

Another thing is is simply internet chair-commander stupidity that wont waste a lot of thoughts team lineup.

But back to topic:
Recons/Snipers with assault rifle and DMR/SR make sense and is a common setup, becaus in most of the armys, there are in the field with only one buddy.

AR + DMR on one soldier in a normal infantry squad.
Pff screw that one. heavy load, main target, way faster fatigue
Grenadelauncher + AR in a normal squad. Makes sense, ofc.

Just a few thoughts:
What we should talk about is, how we prevent the abuse of such a "quick access" slot and what weapons could be carryed in both "secondary" slots.

For example:
Sniper would need two "primary weapons" for example.
But most of the time they dont carry both quickly accessible. (handeling slings etc is way too anoying)

Another thing that should be taken into account is how such a "quick access" slot will work.
Just try to carry two weapons quickly accessible and you will face some ergonomic problems youn dont want to have in a firefight. For example a fast way to go prone. (and a shitload more)

And yes again there are examples where its still make sense to carry two quickly accessible "primary" weapons but this involves.
Fitting circumstances where the negative effects having not so much impact, a lot of training to handle the equipment right, etc. etc.

I could go on for a couple of pages to explain it to you but it would be too much for the average user to read so i skip that.

Iam still sceptical about such a feature:

  • not everyone is a highly trained solder
  • wrong implementation could lead to CoD-like gameplay, bad balance and so on
  • only usefull on very few situations (i asume you dont want to play the "solo rambo army" game)
  • generaly too much hollywood invovled to be taken serious

boid: couldn`t be more agree.
I guess the gameplay effect would be more negative than positive. A lot of players will gear up with 50 .cal and a machingun.
I know from realife experiance in CAS situations putting my teammates gun on the back and pointing my own at the enemy, it sucks. Getting his gun in the back of my head going prone. Getting stuck when passes through bushes and trees.
When all packed up with 120 L backpack filled with stuff and ready, it`s bullshit getting another weapon.

You are aware that the mission designer sets up what is/isn't in the mission right.

Not everything is basic infantry, SF/SOU, etc. are in the series, some people go beyond just infantrymen.

Seems you're over complicating the situation.

The whole idea is instead of being required to carry a backpack to carry a 2nd weapon that you pick up or start with, or however you acquire one. You should be able to grab a 2nd weapon if you so choose to carry one with you without the need of a backpack, you won't magically carry more ammo, you'd have to divide things up accordingly with what you're carrying. Especially if you're not carrying a backpack.

For a real world example of situations which this pertains to the Seals sometimes will carry an MP5 as a back up with a silencer along side an M4 or some other type of weapon.

Snipers as you mentioned sometimes will carry a carbine/rifle with them if they're going out alone or with just one other person, they might even use a drag bag.

You're breacher/Combat engi may carry a shotgun for breaching.

Overall the point is to allow people to use the launcher/backpack slot for a 2nd weapon if they so choose to. This isn't Battlefield, call of duty, or any other locked down game. It's ArmA, where the mission designer decides how things will be set up & can even lock things down if they really want to, however ArmA is about freedom of choice.

You two are aware there is a fatigue system in the game/weight right? The more you carry the faster you drop/slower you move or you won't be able to carry over a weight capacity all together.

boid added a comment.Jun 13 2013, 9:58 AM

I agree with you on some points SGTIce, but i still see the problems that could be done to the gameplay with a feature that is abuseable.

Like Brynjard said, we would face alot of .50Cal and MG combos in multiplayer and for me personally, it would break down the atmosphere of an simulation environment to zero.

The example with MP5 + AR or breaching shotgun + AR are good to discuss about how such a slot should work.

You dont have you secondary (room clearing(...)) MP5 ready to shoot in a real scenarion.
Same for the breaching shotgun.
Almost everything you see on youtube, liveleak etc is mocked up, remeber that.

So in general I also would like to have such an option.
But(!) not as a "switch weapons in a split second" way and also not without any additional handicaps except of weight.

Remember ArmA3 wants to be a simulation and basic gameplay implementation have to be rock solid for that.
Please dont try to break it with "personal prefered" features. (also in regards to time that have to be spent into development)


Pointless bickering deleted. Keep it constructive here; everything else belongs on the forums.

EDIT: Looks like I deleted one too many posts. Sorry, DarkWanderer. :)

Regarding unreal-exploit weapon combos, like the mentioned .50cal + MG, remember Arma2 OA. Having certain weapons, precluded carrying AT launcher or a backpack.

In Arma 3 it would be enough to add an "isUnwieldy" entry in weapons' configs, with the possible values:
0 for small, light, short weapons - SMGs, breaching shotguns, maybe carbines and bullpup rifles too;
1 for long OR heavy weapons - sniper rifles, marksman rifles, ARs, AT launchers, maybe also grenade launchers (both standalone and underbarrel, when attached to otherwise class "0" weapons);
2 for long AND heavy weapons - antimateriel rifles, MGs.

The following combinations would be possible (weapon in hands + weapon in AT slot): 0+0, 1+0, 0+1 with a handicap to movement. Trying to combine 1+1 setup or having a class "2" primary weapon, would lock the AT slot down.

Okay, since my post got unfortunately deleted (no problem with that; thanks for cleaning up, anyway), I'll add some more weighty arguments.
Main argument against, as I see, are "it's special forces only"/"it's unrealistic".
I'll just leave it here: (FM 3.21-11 SBCT INFANTRY RIFLE COMPANY, US Army Field Manual), section 1.7-c-1-b:

Squad Designated Marksman. Although normally functioning as a rifleman within one of the fire teams in a rifle squad, the squad designated marksman is *also* armed with the M24 7.62-mm sniper rifle.

This precisely means that regular infantry companies (Stryker Brigade Combat Team) employ specialists (marksmans) carrying two weapons (M4 and M24). Either there are many CoD fans in the army, either having 2 weapons yet finds use in RL forces sometimes. (Though, even it wasn't - regular forces don't employ IR laser pointers and SCUBA diving, don't they? However, we see that in ArmA 3.)

2armapirx: IMHO, even that won't be needed, provided proper weight-fatigue system is implemented. If you try to take an M60 and an M107 in ACE, you will be able to run less than 50 meters before collapsing. Adding to that engine-provided aim shake will deter anyone from trying to play a walking arsenal :)
Although, the idea is nice. I would only suggest changing the name, because "is" prefix suggests a boolean value (true/false), not something with 3 or more values.

Carrying a rifle and an AT launcher, also means carrying two large and bulky weapons at the same time. Apparently no one has problem with that, then why the opposition against two rifles? I did a quick research and compared weights of 11 RPGs (launcher + rocket). Weights ranged from 2.7kg to 19kg, with median 10.3kg. With it's usual length, AT is a good piece of gear to haul around and we do it regularly since OFP. It's about time, to be able to hang smaller and lighter secondary rifles from these shoulders.

It was meant to be a boolean, but after a bit of thought, I've changed it, but the name remained. Treat this as false, true, very-true ;) Since this is only a proposition to resolve the issue, it could be "bulkType" config entry, with three possible values.

boid added a comment.Jun 13 2013, 6:49 PM

Good document.
Yes there are regulations and planned structures, sure there are.
But my experience from the german Bundeswehr is, that this stuff dosent matter that much down in AFG, you wil always adapt to the circumstances. Gernerally that means reducing equipment and put away useless stuff the regulations said you should carry.

Noone complains about that?
Not in the gaming community right, but in real life even machinegunner getting annoyed very fast.
Actuall its so annoying, if you carry a GPMG on a patrol, you hardly carry much more than you weapon, and one (1 .. O N E) additional ammo box.
The MG3 I carried often only weight around 11kg, most of the western shoulder fired RPG systems weight that much or more on their own.

The guy with the RPG system generally is much more pissed than the machinegunner ... and you dont wanna fuck with one after 10km of walking.

The reason why this is legit is because is a general setup in almost every army, still the implementation in ArmA is lacking a LOT of handicaps for this kind of setup.

And yes, weight is major handicap, but if you ever would had to carry such a setup you would know your combat efficiency is reduced by at least 50%.
Intruduced by slow and carfull movement that is necessary to not mess up in slings, or get pinned by a bush.

Try it and out yourself (as i had to..) and request it again ....

MG isn't the best example. In Arma 2 OA you can't have MG + AT, not even a backpack for MG gunners. So there is a thought behind these limitations, that MG gunner carries enough and can't take more. This is correct and we'll see how Arma 3 Beta will handle MGs. But I agree with you, that putting 6 boxes of MG ammo on the gunner isn't the best idea and that the MG's weight should have influence on gunner's movement ability, speed, tiring and so on.

Most of the ATs and RPGs, as well as various individual weapon systems out there, were designed to be man-portable afterall. Sure, they're heavy and uncomfortable, but no one said it's going to be easy. In the end your MG and PRG guys did walk those 10km, even if that made them unhappy. What Arma needs, are limits linked to fatigue, tiring and combat (in)efficiency, rather than not being able to carry equipment.

This is broader issue of Arma soldiers being extremely fit and very hard, if not unable, to tire. Sure, you can't sprint forever, but jogging across the whole map, over the steep hills and whatnot, with insane loadout, is very possible. A3 Alpha introduced fatigue, but this feature still needs much work, to make it perform like it should, and I really hope, that at some point in Beta this will be presented in a more finished shape, to be evaluated by testers and the community here.

You've mentioned lack of real life handicaps in Arma. I agree, but take a note, that Arma, because of how certain things work there, puts a different set of handicaps on the player. A digital world, as seen on the screen, won't replicate the reality, at least not until complete VR, like in Matrix movie, can be achieved. Maybe you know this, but it's often much easier to fly a real aircraft, than it's simulated counterpart and even multimillion dollars professional, full motion sims, have many limitations, which can and had contributed to accidents and incidents in the past.

Last, but not least, Arma is a game afterall, even if a realistic game, and it has to provide entertainment before anything else, which means compromises. You may not like some consequences of this statement, as much as I don't like them, but it's how it is and I think we are fortunate enough to have Arma at all, even in its current shape.

Ah yes, I had the "pleasure" to carry a real MG for a couple hundreds of meters, without a sling. Even if it wasn't 10km march, I know what you mean. This, and other experiences, are the source of why I have issues with super-fit Arma soldiers. A man can be fit, but sooner or later he has to rest, no matter what. Try a demo of Combat Mission: Shock Force and observe fatigue there. That's more like it!

boid added a comment.Jun 13 2013, 10:05 PM

Nice explanation, my appreciation on that.
You lined out the basic problem here.

Maybe through that now its more clear where I see the problem with that specific feature request.

I'll try to add some points to that:
You mentioned it already, its a game so you cant (and dont want to ofc) simulate anything.
On the problematic of carrying two "main weapons", to make it close to reality or at least prevent action-like mechanics, you have to take much things into account that are not covered by the current state of the implementation.

Frankly I dont see the point in adding a lot of logic and changing a single feature (the frtigue system) to make one special case of equipment combination be reflected in a realistic way.

If there would be more use of such a heavy change, maybe it would make for mo e sense for the whole product, but i cant see where else it could be used.

/edit: Yes there are easy and quick ways to implement this feature but it wouldnt be anywhere close to feel authentic or acceptable to me and for sure many more people that know the tiny painful things related on carrying equipment. :)

Wasn't referring to live leaks nor have I been to the site.

It's not a matter of personal preference so much as personal freedom. A smart person would only have the minimum required as to be able to move faster, while someone whose a mule, breacher, etc. may carry more equipment.

You keep looking at things from the closed box view of every other game i'm assuming you play.

As I stated before in ArmA everything in the mission aside from terrain/preplaced objects is based upon what the mission editor puts in the mission. The mission editor can allow/disable anything or simply not put it in at all. Such as the mission editor not wanting you to be able to have a HMMWV, they can do that. If they want to give you an assortment of guns at the start they can. If it's a SOU type mission and they want some players to have a 2nd gun for CQB/Medium engagements such as a diver team, breacher, combat engi, sniper, etc. they can.

It's not about your personal preference, it's about the mission designers.

armapirx, that is essentially what we've been trying to get at this whole time. It's been done in ACE already before.

To my knowledge most of the anti material rifles don't allow you to carry a backpack/AT anyways as it is, same goes for some of the machine guns. Thus previous points overruled.

boid added a comment.Jun 15 2013, 1:49 PM

I see it more from a developer perspectiv but from my personal reference point in terms of effort in correct/authentic/usefullness (you name it) implementation and reward from such an implementation.
Its a little bit like the female soldiers request on the outside, but on the inside you propably have to adapt much more game mechanics.

But it seems nobody is taking a look out of everyones own little box so far.

So lets go for the crossfinger tactics ... and hope the finaly implementation will at least introduce strong negative effects on fatigue ...

Female soldier require much more than a simple 3D character who will use the same animation than male.
First : female and male have different body, different bones, different tolerance and different way to move, you need to recreate a new 3D character and almost all animation with it, you also need to recording new voices and fix compatibility problems with a character who have a different size.

Weapon on secondary slow don't require any big modification of the game structure, its just a problems of ID that allow weapon to be set in a position rather than another, it can also allow SMG to be equipped as pistol or/and secondary/primary weapon, but bigger than SMG can't fit in pistol place, MP7 is almost too big but a simple UZI or M93R is not and can fit easily on the leg with adapted holster.

And NO !!!
No more fatigue, the actual soldier are ridiculously weak, i have not make any sport or exercise since 2 year or more and i still have way better tolerance to effort even with my full heavy airsoft equipment compare to soldier in Arma 3, i have try several mods this afternoon and for check my weapon i have simply run from initial position to an ammobox and go to a vehicle to take my distance with my bots that i have kill and for run 20m its become almost impossible to aim a target at 200m with full equipment cause he is exhausted, he is not able to hold his breath more than 5 seconds who are ridiculous and i have try a lot of time but hold breath don't cause a major difference its ridiculously unstable when we don't hold our breath.
Their are supposed to have military training and year of activity, i spend almost all my day on my room and and the only exercise i do is use the stairs for go to eat and i'm physically more trained than them...
So please NO, no more negative effect on fatigue, its actually ridiculously too much, i feel like i playing with asthmatic guy who carry brick and metal or a neutron star in his backpack...

Edit :
I have just try again and i have more stability and can more easily put my scope cross on the target in stand up position 9x zoom and aim something like 1500m away tree and breath ridiculously hard that almost make me pass out cause of hyperventilation than Arma 3 soldier on kneeling position at 200m after run less than 50m and spend most of the time to drive, take object in the virtual ammobox and take a good cover behind the car...

But it seems nobody is taking a look out of everyones own little box so far.

I'm surprised how many people can fall for this obvious manipulation (aka trolling).

1.Many soldiers are carrying a grenade/rocket launcher in addition to the main weapon - check.
2.A rifle/shotgun/SMG is lighter and more convenient to carry than a said launcher - check
3.Law enforcement, special forces, regular infantry frequently carry two weapons (confirmed by videos, books and manuals) - check

And now we got some guy saying:

  • He tried himself to carry an MG for some distance and now considers it impossible for everyone else to carry it for 10km (sic!)
  • It smells like hollywood to him (no comments)
  • That everyone else is full of logical fallacies, but he is the one and only carrier of the ArmA mindset (all in white)
  • He doesn't want players to abuse it
  • And on top of that, he blames everyone and everything for being engaged in all kinds of logical failures/biases.

And the above stuff somehow transforms to "it's not realistic" and "carrying two weapons is CoD-Hollywood-unrealistic" (sic!!!) and hence it does not exist - even though the facts say otherwise...

I'm not surprised such people exist. I'm surprised anyone can take him seriously.
Come on, guys, it's not funny. It's such an obvious demagogue logic/trolling that I can't believe anyone else will not see it. I'm wordless...

boid added a comment.Jun 15 2013, 5:26 PM

Weapon on secondary slow don't require any big modification of the game structure.

In a perfect world, where your assumption is placed, it shouldnt be not much more difficult to implement a 3D Model. ;)

The endurance of the soldier is a "little bit" low ATM, thats true.
I just asume that this will be "fixed" in the final version. So there is still space for handicaps where they are needed and not everyone running out of breath after 5 meters of walking.

Another thing I want to mention again is that not only weight influences your endurance.
No hard feelings, I dont know if you have any experiance with military equipment and service, but when you do, you will agree that you handle your "mocked up military" / painball equipment and paintball-markers way different from real equipment and guns.

Actually the handling of different kind of rigs and backpacks and the ergonomics they bring with them influencing you endurance the most.

Maybe you can imagin when you try to carry a 20kg weight with a single sling over you shoulder, with your bare hands or with a backpack.
You can try out at least. And I think everyone will agree that there is a major influence from that.

Sad to say but reality (and a proper simulation) isnt simply about weight.
Like Donald Norman said, simplicity is not the answer.

boid added a comment.Jun 15 2013, 5:37 PM

And now we got some guy saying:

  • He tried himself to carry an MG for some distance and now considers it impossible for everyone else to carry it for 10km (sic!)

Thats what you wanted to read, but not what i've wrote. Read again please.

  • It smells like hollywood to him (no comments)

No comment on that seperation of fact without mentioning the dependent statement.

  • That everyone else is full of logical fallacies, but he is the one and only carrier of the ArmA mindset (all in white)

Trolling approach because again missunserstood on purpose.

  • He doesn't want players to abuse it

Thats a basicly bad thing, I learned that by now ...

  • And on top of that, he blames everyone and everything for being engaged in all kinds of logical failures/biases.

Repeated, not recognized trolling approach and again only the way you want to see the statements. Maybe a little bit too emotional here?

and hence it does not exist - even though the facts say otherwise...

Never said it dont exist. The other way around is true, I said alot it is realistic but a minor side setup. And again missunderstood on purpose.

I'm not surprised such people exist. I'm surprised anyone can take him seriously.

Same on you.

Come on, guys, it's not funny. It's such an obvious demagogue logic/trolling that I can't believe anyone else will not see it. I'm wordless...

You traped yourself already. o.O
Just wow.

/edit: And please put at least some ideas of interest in you "post". Your approach of trolling is just a waste of space.

My airsoft equipment are actually a full metal repplica of SR-25 with suppressor, huge handgrip, heavy bipod, big 3-9x50 scope that can perfectly be using on any real weapon, the weight of my weapon is basically the same than the real one, mainly with all accessory i have on it, i have military boots, a ghillie suit, not a toys, a real military one buy on military store, its a really heavy one, M9 GBB who have the same weight than the real one with holster, tactical vest with a big flask, first aid kit, and several heavy things i have voluntary put in it.
The only difference between my airsoft replica and real life weapon is when we shot and the magazine, in the way we use it, in the way we carry it, in the way we aim with and for the size and the weight are the SAME than real weapon, some replica are even make by real gun factory and sometime they are so much realistic that without shoot, look mag or the barrel hole's size a real military with experience can't notice that its a replica.
AND i have no training and still do way better than the guy in Arma 3, and a friend of my was on one of the best part of the French Army, the Chasseurs Alpins, and he agree with me, the guy is actually ridiculously too much affected by fatigue...
Don't forget that weapon in Arma have realistic specification, but its WAY more easy in real life to compensate movement than using mouse, and when even without by exhausted he embody a stupid unable to be a minimum stable, adding it with the fact that you are exhausted really fast and more exhausted you are and in a too much way it affect your aiming it result an useless, stupid and unrealistic difficulty, simulation or not we still play for pleasure and not for fight against an asthmatic guy with Parkinson's disease.
And anyway Arma don't simulate weight reparation, you can carry the weight where you want the result is the same in Arma 3.

And its not that hard to allow weapon to be use in main and "launcher" slot, exactly like you can create a weapon and just change a SINGLE setting that will make it considerate by the game as a launcher, you will still be able to use it like regular weapon and use attachment and use another "conventional" weapon in primary slot, nothing else, just that rather than do it, just maybe 2 code line to change for allow it and some other to add on actual weapons for make them able to be set in slot A / B or B / C.
So maybe you think that create animation, recording voice and create a 3D body with equipment and handle a difference height and make this character having different physical characteristic like weight, size, strength, tolerance to fatigue, to injury and way more things is more complicated than just change some minor parameters to allow a software to do what he can even already do.
Even ACE add 1000 time way more complicate feature into Arma 2 than what is needed for allow the game to do what it can already do, download some weapons mods and you will see that some heavy M107 and other sniper take both primary and secondary weapon slot, you can't have a M107 and a rocket launcher, but anyway you can sill carry the rocket launcher in your backpack and its not realistic compare to having it on your back while you have the M107 in your hands.

Yeah, 15 years of Internet use manifest itself :P As wrong as flogiston theory, but still trying to look good by means of cheap tricks. They won't change the fact you're a demagogue, though.

And please put at least some ideas of interest in you "post". Your approach of trolling is just a waste of space.

Look, who's talking :D

Keep (t)rolling, I'm out.

boid added a comment.Jun 15 2013, 8:01 PM

Thanks for the text. I know it can be annoying to type so much stuff.

Just to provide you with a little bit of my experience to maybe enable you to imagine what are the differences between airsoft and real life.
(not to blame anyones hobby or his equipment!)

You know how to wield a gun-like-"toy" thats a replica of a real weapon, thats totaly fine, but still primarly its just about weight you have to handle.
The aiming and the way you have keep your weapon at the ready in real life is in many ways way different from airsoft behaviour.
Its starts with aiming and keeping the weapon at the ready where you dont have to compensate recoil, goes to movement where you have to consider you cant evade slow flying balls, you have a team on your side and have to adapt you position/movement and everything to that. You also often have alot more equipment on your chest than you described above.
These are actually things you will also face in ArmA too.

But all these things are tireing you down in some way.
That is given especally with a second heavy weapon on your back.
I know it from my own service, how annoying it is to have a second weapon on your shoulder and have to be quick on pointing targets, keep up with your mates, find good cover, stay comfotable in the way you move and everytime to avoid getting wrapped up by the bulky, uncomfortable thing(whatever it is) on your back/shoulder in a military environment.

Its not like going on a field with a lightweight 20kg pack for 2h having fun and "restart option". Its more like going in the field where every tiny mistake can potentionally cost your life or even worse one of your mates.
The physical and foremost the mental stress level was sometimes so high, I dont want to experiance that again a single time in my life.
And this is the time where many mistakes happening and every bit of annoying equipment pissed you of ten times what leads to more failures.

Not to blame anyone for not having this experience.

Sure you cant (and wont) simulate emotions but at least they tried to reflect the stress a soldier can experience and thats where the annoying shaking and weaving starts.

To sum MY opinion up (and avoid trool feeding ...)

  • Yes it is possible and makes sense, thats for sure, no question about that.
  • The implementation in Arma should not only enable you to allow the discussed setup but also introducing (simulated ofcurse!) the very ugly things of such a setup.
  • At the moment there is only limitation in space and weight, I hope after so much text i wrote, its clear that this cant be an authentic reflection.
  • An from that given, Iam sceptical about if its really worth to be implemented in a (in my opinion) good way and not only as a gimmick that could destroy more than just the degree of authenticity. (thats is my indirect hollywood "knowledge" criticism)

The last point is very important for a simulation, like Arma wants it to be.

Iam out, enjoy your weekend, bye. :)

boid added a comment.Jun 15 2013, 8:07 PM


Hahaha i lol'd.
Go for the sandbox boy. :)
We are talking when you grown up and put something in thats not only *mimi* and *qqq*.

How about provide us a little bit with your experiences or at least opinions?
Do you have anything to tell us?
What do you think should be done?
+1 maybe?

Come on, dont be shy. :)

You know that 1500M is around 1 mile right?

The french army. . .

The whole arguement against weapons in the 2ndary slot other than launchers/backpacks went out the window when ACE did it.

Boid you absolutely don't know me and don't worry i know how to use real weapon, i won't see you and your disrespectful attitude insult someone of my family but in my family we have some good shooters and my father have take the second place of the French shooting contest, and i am almost good has i was and we don't care about the fact that you don't want to see 2 heavy weapon + a pistol, if you don't like it, its simple, take a SINGLE weapon, how stubborn are you to still don't want a feature in Arma that you have yourself experimented, the worst problem of the simulation is that its a procedure simulation rather than real life simulation and the limitation in game/software is NEVER a good thing.

I'm sure they will implement this feature and if you don't like it, don't use it, simple as that, almost 95% of people here want this feature, the troll is mainly the one who come in a place where we talk about something and critic this idea, like people come in a youtube video about classic music (simple example) to say that classic music are bad...
And its not complicate to understand that we have more accuracy and its more natural, more fluid and we have shorter reaction with our own body than using a mouse.
It is not cause your vision of what a simple video game is a restrictive things where we can't do anything else than shoot that you have to imposing it to everyone, its exactly like people who prefer the Arma 2 body physic where we are like a whale on ground, if you like restriction, don't imposing it to other people, just do it yourself, lets people have more and use less than what you have.
And if you worry about multiplayer, simply find a virtual team who think like you and its done, but please don't impose your unrealistic (boring and stupid) restriction to others.

SGTIce thanks for your disrespectful comment, i can easily and without loose time see what kind of racist person you are.
First, yes, i know the distance of the city that i live in since over 2 decades.
And what about French Army ? its not cause French Army don't prove their "ability to fight" by stealing country and territory from other that it mean its a bad Army, except rape, steal, kill and torture US army do nothing else than French Army on others country.
I'm not the typical french who want to defend the honor of his army, i don't care about who have the best army, but we still have the FAMAS a nice weapon, French are part of the best shooter, we have the best tank on earth, we have one of the best aircraft ever who defeat every other aircraft actually in simulated engagement and we have the best pilot ever and actually the only war our country is implicate in is clearly for help the USA that want again to kill innocent people to stealth a country and oil and other NATO obligation.
And USA is just an example cause no one have a really nice army, per definition a nice army don't exist and we can laugh at every of them, simple as that.

And i have never say something against weapon in secondary slot, i have talk about ACE cause its an example of a "modders made" ability to rework totally the inventory system in a really more complex way than just allow weapon to use two slot, everything i said in this ticket from the begin is FOR weapon in secondary slot.

And anyway we already can put a weapon on our backpack, and its not really logic to put an M107 or a SMAW in a backpack, the only change from gameplay balance side will be that you will be able to change quickly our weapon and don't need to always take back and setup again all accessory and other limitation that the game can't handle without add this feature.

Anyway this discussion here full of racist, disrespectful, selfish and stupid people boring me, i wont answer anymore to your stupidity.

Boid stop trolling or go away.

boid added a comment.Jun 21 2013, 3:57 PM

I see you had fun since.

@SGTIce: Iam not trolling at all. Iam just feeding a troll.
I dont know what wrong on the other end of this line, but in my culture, its reasonable to support an opinion with facts, knowledge, experience, etc.

If someone trys to gag someone else, without any plausibility but stupid trolling(in this case the attemp was aimed at me), i prefer to feed the troll.
Unfortunately the troll was bored of himself and left the building. :<

No hard feelings buddy. ;)

boid added a comment.Jun 21 2013, 4:24 PM

I dont see where i attempted to "disrespectful attitude insult someone of my family".
Nothing to add to this one. *shrug*

"we don't care about the fact that you don't want to see 2 heavy weapon + a pistol, if you don't like it, its simple, take a SINGLE weapon"

To write it in two sentences:
I dont care if you care about my preferences.
But there are a ton of reasons why you should care about possible balance/authenticity problems which can only be avoided with alot of work because the current implementation of Arma3 cant handle some very obviouse problems that are almost exclusively related to the ticket issue.

If you dont understand that, I can explain it to you in pictures or with a song if you prefere ..

"I'm sure they will implement this feature and if you don't like it, don't use it, simple as that, almost 95% of people here want this feature, the troll is mainly the one who come in a place where we talk about something and critic this idea"
Sorry to say that, but thats an largly wrong statement.
You may feel trolled. But that may come from a narrow minded sperspective on other opinions.
Beeing "against" a feature/opinion, isnt exactly the definition of trolling. Google it please.
I may annoy you, but I shared my experience and knowledge with you. I explained why I think this can cause a lot of problems. BTW the explenaitions I shared are there primarly to provide information to the developer/reviewer/SCRUM-master/ who ever.

".. like people come in a youtube video about classic music (simple example) to say that classic music are bad..."
Then please start to read my stuff and not only one out of ten sentences. I dont think I blew the door and screamed "GTFO".

So I dont really care about any trolling or blaming attemp because I think the developers will focus on facts and not on a stupid result of a voting process.
To make it a little bit more clear, the voting is mainly an indication for the reviewer to take a look at the information thats provided by description and comments. They dont go "wow 90% upvote, we shall implement this shit". So come one, dont be naive, please. Thats not a mocked up democracy.

" i don't care about who have the best army, but we still have the FAMAS a nice weapon, French are part of the best shooter, we have the best tank on earth,"

Sorry, after reading such a statement, I cant help myself but stop reading.

Spoiler: 90% chance the next post will be a hater

The reference about my family is for SGTIce who begin to going racist, and in general racist people have a small sense of respect.

And in fact it can be true if Arma 3 will be perfectly balance and realistic, but its not, the fact that someone who take a bullet is only affected in visual effect, view with blind effect and difficulty to aim, its everything but certainly not realistic, exactly like the leak of interface, functions and system, vehicle are arcade at 100%, the way we use them is arcade and totally not realistic, the recoil itself and the way we shoot is totally unrealistic, in real life rather than have a small recoil and lets the weapon progressively aim up, we always, almost automatically balance the recoil and the aiming up effect but cause of this the weapon point a lot of time next to the target cause we can't perfectly in a really short delay between two shoot recover the exact position of the weapon.
Battlefield 3 recoil is even more realistic than the one in Arma 3, in real life a shoot don't make you aim up for a single inch, you really have the weapon who go up and with your arms and your body you absorb the recoil and lets the weapon back to the original position by quickly take it back to the target aim trajectory and when you have done to shoot your weapon is not aiming up, but it automatically go down cause the recoil effect finish and you still force the weapon in the opposite side and you have the weapon height who take for a single second before you react the advantage on you.
And when you shoot a shotgun or a sniper, you can't do it in stand up so easily, some shotgun have so much recoil that you are literally ejected backward and fall on the ground like this popular one
Some other have a recoil that make the weapon point up almost 90°, in Arma you don't see that, and its a major issue way more important for balance than people who will be able to carry 2 weapon at time.
A realistic recoil will be the weapon who go way more up at each shoot, return automatically at the position but with a deviation who always change and the goal of the player will be to compensate it and always move again the weapon to the target, in Arma the only thing we have to do actually its just to slowly move the mouse in the opposite direction of the weapon raising trajectory, two problems, first, we have a mouse, we don't just apply a single effect on a direction, we move something, and we don't yet have a space distortion desktop that prevent the mouse the go out of the mousepad, and second, its not realistic and we are not supposed to have a dump guy who can't compensate the recoil of a regular weapon and lets it go up, the real challenge must be to fight against the deviation of the weapon when we lets it back to the initial attitude and the difficulty of the view that shake and really fast go up (like it actually do).
Or even the fact that the guy can't hold his breath more than 5 seconds, sorry but even after make huge effort and be exhausted i can old my breath way more than him and with a correct pause time between two hold, i can do it a lot, like everyone, again a limitation unrealistic and who kill the realism and the balance of the game.

I don't see any problem with this, you can already take 2 weapon at time, just you can equip a single, and you can even have a rocket launcher + a weapon on you + the pistol + a weapon in your backpack, so in fact except the fact that you don't have to ruin the gameplay by need to access to your bag or magically loose every attachment on your weapon cause its on the backpack and the game load the default weapon without attachment, it change nothing, its just way better for people who already using 2 weapons at time.

In fact in a realistic simulation we can even be able to shoot with 2 gun in time, but no one talk about it, just have 2 weapon.
And if you want a limitation, why not a limitation that prevent to take a cal 50 sniper and a MG at the same time just assault riffle + 12.7 or AR + MG with or AR + AR or even any weapon + SMG or SG yes it will be realistic, and maybe take both weapon slot with a single weapon for some ridiculously heavy weapon like cal 50 MG (i don't even thing a beast like this will be available in Arma cause its too heavy for carry it in real life) or any other big weapon bigger than standard MG or cal50 sniper.
And i think 95% of the voter here don't care about your personal preference.
And i can also explain you all this with picture, sound and PDF doc.

Anyways its clear : the game CAN'T be balance if we begin to delete or limit thing possible in real life, its the reason why actually no game is realistic, cause dev see a potential feature and say : i don't think it will be balance.
What the result ? for something who can in fact be perfectly balance by removing this they are forced to change in a unrealistic way all the rest of the feature and bring the thing far away from the reality, its incredible that people don't yet get it : real life is the most balanced example that we have for everything, it in fact balanced way over the human comprehension, if we want a realistic thing, we must COPY real life but certainly not delete things just cause it "look" like a balance issue or adding a restriction that we don't have in real life.

I have exposing to you real fact and correct argument, but if you still don't want this feature do like you want, anyway i'm sure it will be implemented anyways or some shotgun/SMG or eve AR will be modified to be put in the launcher slot if its not or people will carry it in the back pack, in any case we will get 2 big weapon + pistol on us (even the grenade launcher on the AR can be see like a secondary weapon) and the only valid argument you say is that you THINK it can create balance problems, you don't even really say why.
The only issue with game balance i care about is exactly the fact that some feature who must be present is delete or some limitation is put, without realistic limitation and leak of real life possibility their will be no gameplay balance issue anymore, but by limiting a feature you are forced to compensate it cause it create a difference from the real life, that why you need tons of things for balance a game, not cause some feature from real life unbalance it, but cause feature from real life are not resent or totally wrong/limited/inverted.
And more you will want limitation that change the simulation and make it become way form the real world, more balance will be needed, all this balance will also create authenticity and balance issue and more the game will be close to an arcade game rather than a simulation.
I hope you understand.

If our back can carry a launcher, no reason for it to not be able to carry a rifle. In IDF sniper carry their M4A1 or Tavor in addition to their M24 or M82.

Kirill added a subscriber: Kirill.May 7 2016, 12:50 PM

Repit my idea from close ticket
Slot for AT change in the universal slot. To call him "back".
Perhaps we should split "back" into two slot. And soldiers will be able to use the back so: at and at, at and gun, gun and gun.
Keeping the weight of the system will not allow to destroy the balance.

This feature is important not only for what to wear something for themselves, but simply for carrying weapons to anyone. And I hope this feature is useful after the introduction of disposable RPG (and the time has come for a long time)

Yes there atleast should be an "Secondry Weapon Over Shoulder" option.

Voted Up!

Lol of course if you can carry a huge ****ing launcher, another rifle should be equip-able.

Almost all military shooters allow this, including other mil sims like America's Army (which is developed by the US army so arguing against that is odd).

Would be a great feature if you wanted to carry a sniper rifle and then have a carbine or PDW in case things get really hairy. We're not asking for 2 primaries AND a launcher, just substitute a launcher for another primary

Why is this causing so much fighting :( if you can hold a rifle and have a launcher on your back, than you can hold a rifle and have another rifle or at least a PDW on your back. You'll suffer for it the same way you would with a launcher, and you have to carry additional ammo as well.

I have to hark back to what DarkWanderer said here

The DMR of a squad should be able to carry a 7.62 fully equipped AND his service weapon (M4) as well as his side arm. Given that they can carry a primary weapon AND a launcher in just about any situation (unless limited by scripting) then why not be able to fill that slot with a second primary weapon? Much more realistic than a Marksman carrying a Titan Launcher at least.

To the element of "fatigue" just let the values ride. If someone tries to be a "walking arsenal" they can just get there when they get there (hours from now) given their fatigue levels.

Just seems like a logical change to make with the "secondary slot" allowing a second service weapon (rifle) to be in there as easy as a launcher.


madsolosniper, only one way here — change engine's parameters. Logically it looks easy to do and not ruin engine at all. Just need human's time and attention. ).
Here is a topic, where u can find enough to understand why w/o modifying of "how" engine "