In Arma2, it was possible to hold breath whenever you wanted, wether your were looking through the sights or not.
In Arma3, you MUST be looking through the sights to be able to hold breath.
Sure, at first it might seem useless to hold breath without looking trhough the sights, but actually it' s not, because in real life it is very difficult to look through the sights with nvgs on your face not only when using magnifying optics, but also with iron sights or even with reddot/holo sights, thus most of the shooting is done by aiming with the laser.
To replicate that, in Arma2 i forced myself to try to use only the laser at night, without using the sights on top of the weapon, but in Arma3 i can't do that anymore, as the inability to hold breath make hitting a target past a certain (close) distance reliably downright impossiple.
So Bis, even if i can perfectly understand you not imposing contraints on using mechanical or reflex sights with nvgs as it would be very difficult to implement realisticaly and believably from a technical point of view, please allow the few of us who like to "roleplay that" to do so, as it was possible to do in Arma2.
In Arma2, it was possible to hold breath whenever you wanted, wether your were looking through the sights or not.
- Legacy ID
1 Load editor, place a soldier as player and preview.
2 Try to hold breath without looking throught the sights.
I already have those 2 on different keys, and have done so since Arma2, thank you.
It has nothing to do with the issue at hand: Your character will not hold breath if you are not looking through the sights, no matter which key your hold breath key is or if it' s the same key as the one for looking through the sights or not, or if it' s the same as the one for "zoom temporarily" or not.
Since you apparently were mistaken about the issue at hand, i think that you should remove your vote against it.
Excuse me, but how can somebody be against this? Unless this is a case of misunderstanding as happened before in this issue, but then the person voting againt should take the time to read the issue and it' s comments (it' s not like there are tons of them in this issue) properly.
So i would appreciate if the persons voting against this issue in general would take to the time to explain why they are against, since i can' t see any explanation myself, it' s not like it would force you to hold breath constantly and die of asphyxia...
An added complication/enhancement could be the ability to only hold breath underwater (while not wearing a UBA) while one is holding down the "hold breath" key. This would add quite a bit of immersion to swimming underwater as your finger might get physically tired as you dive.
Why not Feint, this is something that i have never thought about before and it does sound interesting.
But maybe it is worth opening a new issue for it? I' m thinking that way since with what your proposing we' re dwelving into the territory of new features, while what this issue is about is really only to get back (and that's perhaps the most infuriating aspect of this issue) something that was one of the basic functionalities of Arma2.
But what you' re proposing does definitely sound interresting and at first sight i' m all for it.
Obviously i' d have to try something like that to have a definitive opinion about it but considering your work on the diving aspect of this game and even Arma2 i' m trusting your call when it comes to this.
IR lasers are not meant for aiming. They are only really meant for pointing out targets. Even so, lasers are only useful in CQB scenarios, not sharp shooting.
Your attitude and vocabulary don't belong here. Just accept that not everybody agrees with everything you say, and stop labeling them accordingly.
IR lasers are primarily meant for aiming. They are there to compensate for the difficulty of using the usual aiming method with nvg on your face. (And not only with scopes, but also with ironsights and even with reddot/holo sights.)
See this thread for example:
The ability of pointing out things to allies is a "bonus", with the downside that it can reveal your position to the ennemy if he has adequate equipment.
If you really have to do sharpshooting at night you use a scope with an nv addon. I don' t see what this have to do about the issue at hand.
Still i don' t see for which possible reason one could be against this. All that it would do is to add the possibility to hold breath without having the sight' s up, as it was possible in Arma2 and is not anymore in Arma3 which is a REGRESSION. You don' t wanna use it? Just don' t.
I have absolutely no problem against people disagreeing with me, but so tell me, what is your counter argument?
For which possible reason are so much AGAINST this that you don' t want people like me to have that possibility?
Ok but Impossible is an overstatement. I can engage targets at 100m just fine with the IR laser. Hell even 200m is decent. At what range are you worried about? Closer in it just gets easier. There is no insane sway. I'm pretty sure IRL you cant hold a gun as steady when you fire from the hip, even with lasers. IRL you are the one actively stabilizing your weapon, not some magical force. In the game, you actively stabilize the weapon with your mouse. IRL I highly doubt holding breath provides any benefit when hip firing.
I'm not disagreeing here, I'm saying you're over exaggerating. Also don't get so annoyed when a few people disagree while the majority do. It's not like BIS ignores your ticket if it doesn't get a perfect score. Dude, you're 18/3.
Also, you're logic of it being an altis life player makes no sense. Why would someone labeled as casual not want a feature that makes aiming easier?
Hey guys, sorry for the delay in answering, and sorry for the language used, it was out of line i admit.
But Arma is the last bastion for people looking for a game where things "make sense" instead of being arbitrarily "balanced", i don' t want it to follow the route of the Ghost Recon or Rainbox six license so i can get a bit defensive.
Benargee, it might be a bit of an overstatement but who cares? The fact is that you can' t hold breath if you' re not looking through the sights while you could in Arma2 and that it makes no frikking sense because contrarily to what you' ve said you' re never firing from the hip in Arma. And once again it is especially infuriating to me because it was possible in Arma2 and isn' t anymore in Arma3.
Also engaging targets at the distances you describe is fine when fully rested on a range, but in combat shooting after having been exausted you will find the lack of the ability to calm the sway for a few seconds to take a decent shot sorely missing, to a point where i simply end up using the sights even if i try to force myself not to, simply to be able to calm the sway without having to wait 15 seconds for the character to have rested.
About my logic of it being an Altis Life playerthing , i' ve said Altis Life but i might as well have said KOTH or Battle Royale or any of these game modes player. The COD/GTA community in general.
The thing is, there are many issues where even though i am in favor of it, i can clearly see and understand why would people be against it.
For this one on the other hand i couldn' t at all, going by the reasoning that it really was one of those "Don' t want it? Don' t use it case".
Until i thought about one thing: People playing with the crosshair on, being afraid that such a feature might basically render sights useless upto 200 meters or so, as people could simply shoot with the crosshair at longer distances by holding breath.
Well, to these people, why don' t you open an issue and ask BIS to make the crosshair less accurate, or just remove the crosshair on your servers?
(I' m pretty sure there' s already an open issue about making the crosshair less accurate).
The reason i get so mad is that these people who only came to this game license since Arma3 and only to play their arcady game modes want the core game mechanics to be the way they want, that is suitable for their arcady gameplay.
I disagree. I play this game license since OFP looking for a realistic gameplay and thus i think that i have more of a right to be heard than these people.
I don' t go over to the COD/BF or GTA forums or issue tracker or whatever to ask the dev to make the game Arma2 like do i?
Well i expect the same from you guys.
Tsark said: " I play this game license since OFP looking for a realistic gameplay and thus i think that i have more of a right to be heard than these people."
Dude, you just ruined all your credibility. You're not owner of Arma.
You can argue, tell your opinion but never judge you're above other people.
The force of your arguments should be sufficient. If not, move on to other issues.
I expected this kind of answer.
And i stand by my point.
When i see that a mod such as AGM didn' t win a single dollar while things such as king of the hill and battle royale won 30 000$ (!) and 50 000$ (!?) it seems very obvious:
The "original" players of the OFP license should let their voice be heard and YES, their voice has more of a right to be heard because if we go by the suicidal principle that each opinion sould be weighted equally Arma4 will be worse than BF, because numerically, they FAR outnumber the "original" players, as has been shown by the MANW results, with RHS being the exception confirming the rule.
Didnt take long to talk about MANW. Ok, really you're mad that AGM didnt win in the multiplayer category? AGM lost in it's category, total modification, to guess who... RHS. You said RHS was just fine winning.
Also, if you enjoy the "features" of Arma 2 you can also disable fatigue, something that arma 2 didn't have as developed as arma 3. You wont be sawaying youre laser as much. And no, your opinion doesn't matter more than anyone else's.
By the way, I was standing, when I was testing laser aim.
Stop comparing this game to other games. I'm so sick and tired of people comparing things to the popular AAA titles.
If you want to compare, if you love firing from the hip, go play CS. Don't get all technical about firing from the hip, I'm talking about not aiming down sights.
Actually, at the time i wrote that post i wasn' t "mad" at all regarding AGM or anything MAWN related. Now on the other hand, that AGM has just annouced that they stopped, i' m pretty pissed off at this MAWN stupidity.
And once again, i stand by my point about RHS: It is a well deserved first place, the stupidity is that the contest is organized is such a fashion that something such as AGM didn' t win a single dollar while stuff such as the afore mentioned game modes win the amount of money that they won.
Stop looking for contradictions...
About Arma2 and the fatigue: You do understand the difference between technical progress and game design choices don' t you?
There are many areas in which Arma3 is MUCH better than Arma2, no doubt about it but sadly there are also some things that were fine before and that got ruined by stupid game design choiches.
And for the record i' m absolutely fine with the fatigue.
"By the way, I was standing, when I was testing laser aim."
Don' t get all technical.
"If you want to compare, if you love firing from the hip, go play CS"
LMAO what can i even answer to that...
I'm removing my support from this. This is a feedback tracker, not a soapbox to stand on complaining about the results of MANW. If you don't like the results, there are forums for that.
I don't like the harsh language used. I'm not gay, but the word "fag" used is degrading to a whole group of people, similar to the N word. That word needs to stop being said.
I don't agree with the idea that longevity of playing gives you any credibility. You want respect in the community? Contribute to the community with useful things. You won't inherit it because of good attendance.
Good ideas can come from anywhere and they all have equal weight. I've made a bunch of mods and addons for Arma games, but that doesn't give me any right to speak over anyone else in the community.