Priority level says normal not major Kid.

Golf clap for your chaos.

That's a good step towards helping em figure it out, though it may be a driver/card issue.

dxdiag & Screenshot would help the devs.

From what I heard people talking about in a stream at one point game booster seems to break ArmA 3.

dxdiag & crash files if you have em.

Refer to the "How to" at the top right.

The whole point of ArmA is to not have UI.

UI just gets between my gun & my bullets. When thing's get in between, they cause problems. Guns are designed to solve problems.

After you use a keyboard for a while you don't even look down.

Shift + #s would even be a better way then having things the way they are currently. I'd rather not have to juggle a radial menu to go through my weapons. I just want to hit a button combo that's set by default or I set up myself & pull out my weapons, including explosives.

The reason I brought up juggling a radial menu is at times in RBS6 it became a real pain to do that & it's also a pain if you have multiple weapons in your pack or something. Would just be a lot easier to assign a number & cleaner.

Less UI I have to deal with the better.

A radial menu is not a solution to weapon/ammo swapping that's yet another gimp to an age old problem which has been solved for years.

We're not in 1999. This is 2013, i'd rather be able to select my weapons with my # keys if I so please. Or change ammo types by holding Shift + R.

However now think I think of it they could do both.

Shift + R to change ammo with the ability to configure individual weapon types such as Primary, Secondary, Pistol, Backpack, etc. to keys if we so please

Holding down R could bring up a menu similar to what the Rainbow Six games have been doing for a while which allows you to change your weapons that way.

Though i'd prefer just hitting a button to change weapons.

Same could be done for a use key if need be which would open a lot of possibilities for scripters. If they could map actions/such to sub context menus via a radial menu.

The self/interaction menus are just work arounds for an age old problem. One which at times really makes me wish BIS would create a new engine from the ground up for the future that works with modern day tech/common place things which have proven their worth in gaming.

That's the idea

Shift + R to switch if you have just two or maybe open a small interface would be an interesting idea, or something along those lines.

That's not per se a bug. It's there for things similar to SP & what not. Take control of the squad and you won't have that problem.

Regardless you shouldn't have an AI for an SL if you don't want to be magically ejected?

Suprised this is still open after all this time.

Managed to get the game running after getting admin to use the ZA work around.

Yep, late reply by a year, but yep.

Can't uninstall Zonealarm without admin, which I currently cannot get access to.

It's not a port problem roger, it's likely Zone Alarm.

Speaking of which, what is the status on getting ArmA 3 more AV friendly?

Mise:
Attempted -nobenchmark on various attempts to launch my game
Tried -Noworld=true
Tried without Xfire
Verified steam cache & tried developer branch, nothing has worked thus far.

Tried that already, all I had was Zone Alarm Forcefield, toolbar wasn't there.

. . .

Biggest problem is some people don't seem to realize the geneva convention has nothing to do with it. The way things go in ArmA are not a 1 : 1 reflection of reality.

Low priority, seems you need your priorities straightened out.

Not wearing masks? Tell that to SoF.

Insurgents, and other non-established militaries don't tend to care about rules.

Throughout the iraq war they've walked up in friendly uniforms/killed people.

They don't need to implement the geneva convention, it has nothing to do with that. If someone wants to have it that way they can script it.

If you voted against this you're a close minded idiot. That is all.

Yea you kinda duped this one bud.

Refer to kids link, that's the original.

That defies the idea of having the tools/being an engineer.

The ability to do that was added in OA a year or so ago around 1.6 so it might be in or it might be coming in later for the Engis.

So it's fixed then so they can lose it or....?

Can we get a mod to close this since the OP is confirming the problems been solved.

You don't, you just let it die.

Or it could be the fact some people are trigger happy & don't know gun control.

Thus proving my point according to the two notes above.

They are not hard to differentiate between if you study them briefly. It's the same way it's done in RL, done in a lot of games, etc.

They don't need tweaking people just need to learn the camos. In every game i've ever played it's never been an impossible debaucle to differentiate friend from foe even when they looked similar.

Go into the editor, put one BLUFOR & 1 OPFOR next to each other, study their camo, the color, their gear, how it looks, etc.

Look at the patterns, design, look at the color of their boots, look at the silhouette they make.

Pretty standard and simple.

It's also great for implementing (If someone is passionate about it)

Game modes where you can load up a cache of ammo, put it into a truck & move it around, or maybe you're like me and just want to be able to drop a supply crate into the middle of the field without needing to add custom scripts which cause lag on the server.

If this were to be implemented who knows maybe some day in a DLC we could even get drag bags (With weapons inside) for sniper teams, the ability to put your buddy into a bag/drag him if need be on the back of your vehicle, the possibilities are about as limited as the ability of the community to script them in.

The implementation of being able to move ammo boxes around could allow modders the ability to create more complex/worth while content, maybe we'll be able to even push little jimmy into the ambulance now.

Sounds like the AI group logic forcing the AI to wait up since it's part of a group, rather than pursuing the fact it was told to go solo.

The new system is more dynamic as it takes from the ACE system basing how much you can carry off weight rather than slots. Therefore in theory I could carry a large abundance of varying gear types, it keeps things organized and clean.

Good point about not being wounded, seeing as I seem to have forgotten the part about being fatigued, although if you're not fatigued or wounded it may cause a problem, however people can always look down to get an idea.

Implementing this as a feature would remove the need for some problems which people have requested a HUD for.

You can keep acting like a child Prospekt all you want, but some of us have been playing ArmA for years.

6.8 from what i've seen/heard is pretty manageable. "It's got the power of a 7.62 with the recoil of a 5.56", if you're into marketing strats.

Could use more horizontal recoil slightly to offset some of the vertical.

Put some constructive thought out criticism in and maybe they'll adjust things.

JNC if you can't put out any type of substance to support said statement don't waste everyone's time with that crap.

But as people suggested it would likely be toned back/thinned out/sparser to prevent such & make it look more like blood in the water.

If you're not contributing to the ticket Helper, why bother posting?

Red smoke toned back a bit might work.

As kid said, not only that though, you may shoot someone under water, but the water will disperse the blood/break it down pretty fast so it will likely be so thin that you won't notice it.

Unless you hit an artery and the victim profusely bleeds out.

But I want submarines. I can't be the Submarine commanda without my sub.

It could be, but how often is someone going to get shot at in the water & how much of a justifiable difference does it really make?

Likely due to the fact it would put more of a strain on the CPU, not only would it have to go over the network & be processed it would also need transition effects, cleaning up, etc.

Not a justifiable/necessary feature other than for aesthetics.

The AA-12 was designed to be rugged, not every weapon is able to do so.

My experience is gun powder dosen't work well under water. But if you have something to the contrare i'd love to see it.

It's also common knowledge that if you don't clear water from most rifles after coming out of the water it will blow up in your face.

They aren't intended to function under the water only the special purpose MX rifle does.

Make sure to read up on the game/it's indended features in the future.

Some people like to swim

Some games last 24+, or there are the MSO missions which people run for weeks before restarting.

That's off topic and unhelpful wood.

What he's conveying is divers have a gauge which allows them to read the time they have left oxygen wise.

That's not a bug. It's already been posted by a manager/dev.

I've put in tags, attached em, come back later and noticed they were gone. I'm personally aware of the tags being deleted if you don't click attach & instead add a note.

Just noticed it seems to happen only when the person that "attached" the tags adds a note.

If you don't put a space between a # and the ~ (tilda) it does that funny thing with the zeroes.

dxdiag & crash file. Refer to the "how to" at the top right.

Most of the vehicle side of things are coming in beta, so we might just get lucky.

The instruments for the most part have never worked quite properly in an ArmA game, however if you vote for it enough they might fix it.

That should go into a seperate ticket fraser.

They've been updating/improving the engine since the original game.

Legacy issues are present because they scale the engine? I don't work on it, don't ask me.

It's just something that happens pretty rarely so it's likely slipped through the cracks.

Sounds like a legacy issue had it happen to me and ~9 guys in a helo while doing ACE2 domi once in ArmA 2, got stuck upside down, crew tried to bail and got chopped up, we were stuck inverted in a burning helo, most intense 10 minutes of our lives.

That's a legacy problem, had that happen before in ArmA 2. May take about 5 mins or till the rotor finally goes off.

Why are you people continuing this, drop it. There are far more important things going on in the tracker. Don't reply to this either.

Combat positions don't always translate to just infantry.

Why does it seem everyone constantly overlooks the point.

Touche

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/29/marine-corps-women-combat/1873753/

http://nation.time.com/2013/01/25/women-in-combat-vive-a-difference/

Bottom of the second link is the most important.

http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/mmsmrsnapshot.pdf

I forgot to mention females have been in the military for decades.

Russia had women/children serving as Snipers in WW2 yes, that was a last stand hell mary. Their most famous squadron of pilots was an all female squad however.

Which of those armies are being portrayed in ArmA p00d.

So it seems some of you live in wonderland & aren't aware of things or perceive them wrong.

"Females are in the infantry now."

Now they are being considered allowed to join the infantry in the US.

Some other countries may allow them in combat roles & what not. Many of you are just spit balling, not taking into accounts facts or factors.

ArmA is a game derived from VBS a military simulator which many NATO militaries train some of their people on.

The down votes are marginally from the fact Female characters add nothing to gameplay.

ArmA 2 & ArmA 1 had female characters, they just didn't have inventory slots/the ability to wield weapons.

There is no reason to drop everything they are doing to add this one menial feature.

Even if women ever are allowed as full fledged infantry it would likely be in small numbers, while some of you think it's vastly important to add them take into account while they may have the ground work partially laid out there is a lot of tweaking to probably be done. It does not BENEFIT the game itself in anyway. It may benefit players, but why put the resources into that rather than things the community has wanted for close to a decade?

Worlds not complete without female soldiers, god wills it.

Viktor what was the reason for posting said link & why does it matter?

Odds are in favor of female civis, soldiers I still find skeptical.

The whole point is I doubt the devs will have enough of a reason to put female characters in other than maybe a DLC. It's just not a high priority, it dosen't break gameplay.

I'd rather see them add in other functions which improve my gameplay directly then later on revisit this which is a minor issue and reevulate it. That's my opinion, if the devs want to put resources into it that's their cup of tea.

Still though it dosen't seem like something that will revolutionize gameplay. it seems more like a gimmick which will be big for a few weeks then quickly become a foot note after the hype dies.

From my understanding people like to use as most of us have in this report "Woman are not allowed into combat positions" argument, due to the fact it's true. Even if they are now being allowed into them, does not instantly mean that every female is jumping for joy to go infantry.

Most people I meet & talk about games with are more concerned about the core gameplay/mechanics, whether the game is fun, replayable, has longevity.

Some people such as my self love customization, but in most games where i've seen female character models implemented they are abused, society/gaming these days just can't handle said factor at times.

I am willing to wager $100 you will see more males running around as females acting stupid than you will see females, even if the male/female population was balanced. That's one reason i'm personally against female characters being implemented for aesthetic reasons.

If you're in 3rd person you can see your character, but when you need to use your gun, you'll be using first where it doesn't make a difference.

DayZ is done by a separate team Wood & on a slightly different/modified engine. While they could port them they wouldn't be up to par with ArmA 3's models.

That's actually complete bull Em, you must not be very well acquainted with the modding community.

You find a problem, they'll likely find a solution or a work around.

Emu, i've played with women in games that don't have female characters for years. It's not going to do much. They'll play the game if it's appealing & fun, it'll attract more perverts & morons to do stupid things for sure.

Most of what i'm referring to is MP, SP is not really something I bother with.

@Kumeda

A) Not seeing the better gameplay part, how does a female character model add better gameplay? The only thing I can think of is a "CIA" deal with a female character in civillian clothes going cold war shooting at the KGB. That's about the only thing I see, or maybe a female suicide bomber for those that like to RP, beyond that nothing comes to mind.

B) True, but if you're in first person as you likely will be in combat you're not going to notice much of a difference other than your arms possibly being slimmer/your voice.

C) It's not exactly realism in the overall sense, women serve non combat roles mostly as has been stated. They sometimes get ambushed during combat patrol or defending a FOB.

Some people have stated that they aren't allowed to go airborne, Special Operations, i'm quite doubtful most are in infantry, i'm not sure if they're even allowed to do armor at current.

They can pilot, I doubt they're allowed into sniper school, but they might be i'm not an expert.

They are trained more or less the same as their male counterparts to fire a rifle, combat drills, engage the enemy as a unit, etc.

But they are just barely opening the doors to allow them into combat, what most people fail to realize is the change of the law in question allowing them into infantry. Was mostly to allow women to be recognized for COMBAT EXPERIENCE to FORWARD PROMOTIONS.

D) Personal freedoms great, but as someone pointed out you look pretty similar to a guy when you wear all the gear, so what personal freedom are we talking about exactly?

E) Are you saying I can have more fun playing a female than as a male? That dosen't make a lot of sense, the model serves the same function it does the same job. It's just aesthetic, Female model does not equate to more fun.

F) Diversity, sure but does it make enough of a difference to diversify between men & women to implement them. Believe it or not males & females move differently/have different physical structures, a male is often taller than a female, bigger, larger chest, wider shoulders, etc. Females maintain more body fat regardless of how fit they are. Those are the only real diviersifications i'm seeing.

Before the website initially went down from what I saw we had operators from;
US ~ 3
Germany ~ 1 - 2
Britain ~ 1
Italy ~ 1

So just waging a guess, i'd say those are possibly the countries which are going to be portrayed via NATO come release.

If female models role out in a DLC that's great, they could just as easily be added in with another mod, which would save the devs resources which could be better allocated.

All i've read the whole time is I want to play a female character. The end.

There's no justification thus far other than "i'd like them in game, I don't want to play as a male."

I've not seen anything that justifies the devs going out of their way to put them in as a feature over the other things the engine needs fixed, most of which are legacy problems.

I would like the S.A.D. in game, i'd like to be able to hang from a line from a chopper similar to the prison escape in MW2. I'd like to be able to breach/kick in doors, blow up walls with a stick of C4, the underground complexes back.

They could add to the gameplay in some ways, but just changing a model simply for aesthetics is not viable.

Some games have had female main characters and no males, Tomb Raider, Mirrors Edge, other games I probably never played.

Not one person has mad any effort to make a statement then support it with viable/justifiable reason to add them into game.

Halo dosen't have females, Call of Duty, Battlefield, no females. Girls still play em, so I must be confused as to why we need female characters.

The combat groups that have females in them don't go right to the front, they come in after a green zone has been established & the front line is pretty far away.

I'm certain that females were for the most part not serving in too many combat patrols during the initial Iraq war invasion. As I said in a future DLC when we aren't such much invading but transitioning to more of a peace keeping type deal then we might see females in a DLC if the devs see it as having enough of a payoff.

For those that did try to explain why they wanted females though, they were quite vague. All I really saw was aesthetic reasons and somehow making them comfortable? I don't see the difference if you're wearing gear, in first person most of the time (most likely) how being a female character makes a difference.

If I see a good argument for females in game I might support it, till then i'm still waiting for something more than a vague "I think females should be in since they're in the military."

If i'm correct which I may not be, the female soldiers pack or one of the mods I believe was client side, thus you'll see yourself as a female but everyone else won't. So it's not a big deal, it's been done in OA, it's likely to come back.

While i'm not an authority figure, nor does he need to apologize. I'm trying to get the discussion back on track. It keeps getting derailed, most of the notes are insults back and forth & things that have nothing to do with implementing females into ArmA 3.

Just so everyones aware there are a lot of females in the military, no ones arguing there isn't. The whole point is whether or not they'd be involved in this conflict if at all. It's unlikely, even for the ArmAverse at the time being, in a DLC when things in the ArmAverse isn't so heated, females may come in a DLC.

The realistic probability of seeing women commonly in the infantry, at the moment is pretty low, contrary to those of you who saw GI Jane. To date in the US, I have yet to hear of any woman serving in a Spec Ops role.

Some of you keep posting about how you personally feel, don't. If you're not looking to add meaningful input, just don't post.

For some other people here, this is ArmA, it's a game. This isn't a womans rights movement, it's not reality, it's a game. When you hear bullets wizzing past your head I highly doubt you'll be thinking "Am I a woman or a man?"

It's not a feature the game needs to survive or progress, nothing has been put forward to substantiate the need for females still after nearly 100 notes. The only reasoning has been "Equality, because I think females should be in, females are in the military."

None of you have thought your posts through or tried to really justify them with something other than "I want female characters in the game." If you want eye candy that's great, there will be a mod 10-1 similar to the one that OA had.

Personally I just want solid justification for having them added to the game, it really adds nothing.

Unlike bipods/weapon resting
Larger Compass
Adjusting weight ratios on vehicles
Fixing crashes
Improving performance issues

Those are justifiable, there hasn't been much here to justify the need for female models. Even when there has been, it has not been followed up with any substantial argument in it's favor.

Turtle I feel like we're brothers from another mother.

No I sent them an E-mail to remove all the useless political/emotional crap that is flooding the feedback.

All I asked for in the initial 10 or so notes was for some substantiation or justification of why they should be in the game.

What people came up with was more whims & emotional reasons for why but no real reason to have them in the game. people are treating this like a political forum, not a feedback tracker.

Most arguments have not even been backed up by facts.

Worst of all this has received more votes then any feature/feedback that would benefit us currently. Such as performance, etc.

Well when you write the report you have no capability to change it.

On another note i've sent BI an E-mail about the ridiculous comments here.

Really hope they remove that equality tag to. It's less to do with equality & more of a personal gripe.

Some people that have posted don't realize this is Alpha or the part where they
announced not all of the content is in.

Female soldiers I doubt art part of the development plans, future DLC though, plausible, female civilians, likely.

Stop posting about what the priority level is, we're aware.

If you're not adding something to the actual OP or topic which has to do with the implementation of females then don't post.

People, this is not for growing your epeen, this is not for your personal views on females in the military, this is a suggested feature.

Stop filling it with bs, stay out of the conversation if you're going to post sexist or bigotry remarks.

If you're not going to supply a substantial reason for why female character models should be in the game, stay out of the conversation and let the adults handle it.

For ANYONE thinking of adding a note read this before you do.

If you plan to add something make sure it's constructive, fact based & reasonable.

When posting back up your argument, i'm sure you all graduated high school so you should be able to use your essay skills to write a decent argument with support.

She can't change the initial report. Either way they do see combat, but it has yet to be justified as something that NEEDs to be in the game.

Why don't they belong on the battlefield again cheeseburger? You still haven't proven her wrong that you're afraid to get beaten by a Woman.

Someone justify why female models should be in first of all other than band wagoning "Females won't play it unless it has female characters".

The female population already games enough Halo, Call of Duty, Battlefield, Tribes, Global Agenda, etc. They play games whether they have females in them or not. They mostly play them due to the fact they're fun.

No one has justified any real reason to put female character models in the game yet with any substance or reason other than aesthetics.

That in no way seems like a necessary comment Ghostile.

Females have been on the front lines for a while more or less, they're just now allowed to be awarded for their combat experience.

Knowing the community it would be abused to no end.

What does it add to the game which you cannot already experience other than the ability for you to play as a female? Does it really matter? The only differences it would make if you play in first person would be your arms mostly & your voice.

Any solid reasons for putting it in? Having both genders I don't think is going to increase the female population. Some people just aren't into these types of games or they're scared of 'em in general.

Dxdiag
Proof (Video or Screenshots)
Repro steps

That's a legacy issue overall, would also likely cause some strain on the network in larger battles.

It's good, the problem is the arms should cradle the weapon & your weapon should sway.

That's exactly why this ticket exists.