Sometimes used for CAS runs too.

Rogerx, actually it is quite annoying when you are trying to do a little combat engineering in a PVP mission. Say for example there's a crap load of enemy infantry in a bunker tower. Alpha One and Two keeps them suppressed and throws smoke and the like. Alpha Three flanks left through the trees and sneaks up on the tower. They plant a few satchels at the base, but because of the insanely loud beeping noise the enemy knows that they are going to get blown to kibbles if those satchels go off. So they just run out of their bunker, shoot the engineer and his fire team, and disable the explosives. This isn't the only scenario where this is annoying, but it's just an example.

Only if they have no AT (guerilla fighters), but this is extremely rare. You usually won't be able to pull this off without blowing yourself up (unless you want to, which is really dumb). But still, the beeping should not be louder than a cell phone or watch alarm.

Duplicate.

Watch this video. It looks so much better with that camo scheme.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COkplR_5UQA

Yes, but that is the only picture with a sensible camouflage scheme.

^ ^ ^
This would be sweet. Pertaining to the ticket, it is pretty damn easy to kill a manned arty because the commander doesn't care :P I think switching the gunner and commander's roles might work.

It seems things like this are in the pipeline.

it works fine for me. try reinstalling Arma?

Anyone?

Can anyone confirm this?

No, it's on there the right way. The laser detecting dome is in different positions or forms depending on the mission/mechanic/military. It does look weird, but positioning the guidance system at just the right angle allows for shorter distance / higher altitude drops. The GBU-12 kind of zigzags through the air (it intentionally overcompensates how much it needs to move its guidance fins), so the tilting of the dome will make the bomb more efficient and precise. :D

Unassigned?

Hm, and the ghosthawks are pretty damn speedy already. But V-22's will be as ancient as a willy's jeep :P

We could have both?

Hm yeah I guess the V-22 has more cargo capacity. The V-280 is pretty much a newer high speed, smaller, more advanced helicopter transport thingy. There were only 160 V-22's made (they cost over $71,000,000), and they are eventually going to go down in some operation or get decommissioned or something. Either they make new ones, make V-280's, come up with something new, or maybe the US government can't afford to flush their toilets and use civilian vehicles :P

Fixed it.

It is quite outdated, I think the CSAT forces would rather take the fictional but newer MI-48. If you would like TKOH content able to be ported, if not already possible, that is a completely different issue.

Did you try cycling the flares/smoke firing mode? (Ctrl.-G)

I think that the guerilla forces should be underpowered and unbalanced, because the same thing on each side is no fun. It forces you to use tactics to outsmart your enemy & stuff.

Have a look in the "used by" section for the Mk82. If there isn't an F-35 on the way why would there be fully functional weapons designed for an F-35?

http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_CfgMagazines#2Rnd_Mk82

Check that there are no waves.

Well that was fast. Super devs!

Can anyone confirm this? Isn't marked as assigned.

Yes, but it's also in the latest dev branch along with a new tank, IFV, 2 new helicopters, black MX rifles, IR grenades, a new scope, armor piercing sniper rounds, a new backpack, and tons of fixes and other stuff.

This is true, also I don't think the barrel has any collision, does it.

Just give the turret operator control of the designator & ATGMs, and leave the flares & flying to the pilot. Exactly the same as an attack helicopter with an AI pilot. If the pilot (for whatever reason) wants to use the missiles, just have manual fire, exactly like in the attack helicopters.

Confirmed 11/27/13

Bullets should pass through billboards. It's a piece of plastic.

Related to 0016739

In my opinion this guy has it pretty right, aside from the manliness thing (this is a feedback tracker, not ifunny). The heavy vehicles need their weight increased by a few tons. Also they should be able to drive straight over vehicles like the hatchback.

The MH/AH 9 helicopters with FLIR would be useful for scouting, & the MH9 with doors could be for the civilians / police.

How could you down vote this??? This is a game breaking bug for me, it's been there for months. Extremely annoying and it looks bad.

This is a much needed feature.

Fuckin terminators... I think the AI should use the stance adjustments to their advantage too, but also shit their pants if a tank rolls up on their position (by shit their pants I mean sprint in the opposite direction)

There is already a script for this, you can sit on top of moving destroyers, HEMTTs, inside flying helicopters, land on moving aircraft carriers / destroyers, etc.. The only real problem is that BIS doesn't want to add that.

Here:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=plpp&list=PL_cGo1Wks95IGoX3lIv2dFKzEzHYAeNQL&v=FNFNantD8bQ

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=c4-feed-u&v=2tC9M4-vP3w

Female civilians would be fine, maybe NATO / AAF servicewomen, but children? Having children would put BIS out of business for sure (people shooting kids... Wtf). Other games had women in uniform & stuff. Pretty sure Battlefield 4 had it, it'd probably be fine. I'm sure if they added women it wouldn't be like cosplay crap or whatever anyway.

I like the different tracer boxes. Adds some versatility to missions ( BLUFOR, OPFOR, & INDFOR can use it if the mission maker wants). Just my 2 cents

I like the idea, but I'm not sure that this is possible. This kind of technology may explode Arma 3 :P maybe arma 5?

My buddy in Ireland barely shows up when I try to connect to his server, and I'm on the East Coast of the US. He's not even that far away, and I still can't find him.

Shooting C4 (also inside claymores) is like shooting at a lump of clay. The only way you can disable it with bullets/explosives is by completely wrecking the electronics or vaporizing it. And most military grade explosives don't get destroyed too easily.

Suppressors do not hide light. This game is not Colladooty. If you are firing at AI from medium range (at least 400m) and they instantly spot you, that is an AI issue.

No towing in arma 3 :(

The main issue I have with the rudder is that when lining up for a CAS gun run, I adjust slightly , and the rudder swings the nose back the opposite direction. This causes rounds to fly everywhere but the target. I think that what is happening is that after I press a rudder key, the rudder engages in the opposite direction for about 1/4 a second. No idea why it's doing this, but please fix it.

Suppressed weapons do produce flame and light, just not that much light.

9mm rounds seem to be fine for me. In arma, as in real life, armor, backpacks, RPGs, rifles, and anything you can stick between you and a bullet will slow down the rounds. Try shooting them where they aren't wearing body armor (Face, arms, legs. unless they are civilians they're going to wear as much armor as try can carry). The current round penetration system seems good to me :D

Why not either place them in beforehand or deal with it? Real life CO's have to make decisions and adapt to the circumstances. Anyway, it's always fun to be hunted by a tank platoon, or defend the objective from waves of enemy reinforcements with JDAMs flying over your heads (not in real life, but whatever), or other fun stuff. Try it out, it could be more fun than just spawning in an artillery emplacement or CAS jet on demand. I do see your point on how the mission editor might have "misplaced" a helicopter, etc., however I do not think they need to add this as it is already a feature (it requires some programming knowledge though).

The Yak-130 is very likely going to be the OPFOR jet, & it is a 2 seater :D and also a cheaper jet aircraft, perfect for Iran (CSAT, whatever)

I can't even get a lock on an aircraft < 500 m away... And I'm completely stationary. Wtf

WTF??? Apparently they had reactive armor and a RCWS commander gun... but they took it off.

http://www.arma3.com/images/screenshots/large/arma3_screenshot_07.jpg

I think it would help with the collision issue if the waves' height was linked to their spacing. For example, larger waves would have large spacing. So you could have little, bumpy waves and large, rolling waves. The type you would think of in an epic amphibious assault with AAVs and LCACS cresting the waves.

In the "patrol" missions of the Adapt campaign, if you edit the mission file, you can find some CSAT - friendly FIA units. Not sure how they did this, but I hope this helped. There are many features not apparent to many people in the campaign / etc. files.

This would be sweet. The NVGs are way out of place on those helmets.

EDIT: Holy crap, these helmets are amazing! It's too bad they're just eye candy in A3.
http://gizmodo.com/5248464/how-the-f-35-demon-helmet-looks-inside

I think the ACE 3 devs have it in for them simulating the DAS capabilities.

Yeah this is really weird. Noticed this when they added them :P still isn't fixed

This has already been accomplished by modders / scripters. Why not BIS? This script is also possible for large moving ships -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tC9M4-vP3w

Take a look at this -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tC9M4-vP3w

This is also possible for large moving ships.

I'd really like the clouds to make shadows... An incoming thunderstorm blotting out the sun would look so cool.

The ACE parachutes (At least the T-10s) turn into a sort of 2D object when you land. They could have a 3D model for Arma 3 though (ruffles in the cloth from landing). I'm pretty sure you can repack the chute into your ruck, but I'm not sure why you would want to unless you don't want to leave suspicious parachutes laying around. Anyway repacking a chute takes a while and you really don't want to be caught "with your pants down" repacking a chute. They could disappear after like 30 min so you don't have chutes all over the lawn (though it would look pretty cool).

Hmm... Truesky has this by itself... Is BIS allowed to tinker with the software?

Also some warning lights flashing and beeping sounds so we know when the plane is hit :D

BeepbeepbeepbeepbeeepchunkPSHHHHHHH

WHEEEEEE!

You should be able to use the Laser Designator Batteries for the man packable UAS platforms.

Fixed in Dev build? I have lock warnings, along with a "You're screwed" alarm.

You just can't wait for Altis on Monday, can you? :P only 2 days.

Still not fixed. Apparently NATO isn't able to program helicopter interfaces... In 2035.

DEVS- Take a look at the JSRS 2.0 mod for Arma 3. Makes every firefight sound like the shit hit the fan instead of cap guns!

Have you tried going into the commander's seat?

Also we cannot manually drive it.

Fixed in current version , for me at least. Keep up the good work

Sometimes when a Greyhawk is placed down on dirt, roads, etc, it won't move until I fire the flares.

In the field manual it said the stomper "also has options to take direct control". Wonder why this isn't implemented already :P

The only sound is the explosion of the vehicle :/

I think the character models are actually full of rubber bands. They kind of flip out and tense all their muscles when they die.

Try Blastcore A3. Same amount of particles I think, they're just huge.

To edit my note before, a much simpler way than what I previously said is this:

1. The train has an AI computer that is driving the train and is taking orders from the "Commander" (Really the driver) as in an armored vehicle.

2. The train can only find a path on the rails. (Actually 3m wide roads to the AI, but look like rails.). I am guessing that the rails would have to be a different type of path, so you don't have cars driving down railways and the trains don't drive on roads (Though very amusing).

3.When piloting/copiloting (After taking controls) the driver can order the train AI to drive forward (Fast/slow), back, or stop.

4. If the mod creator would like rail junctions, though taking significantly more scripting/work, he could have a UAV Terminal interface only accessible when driving. The driver could then mark a waypoint on the map, and the train would then find the fastest route on the railways. The only options the waypoint would have would be the speed. Unfortunately, there may be issues with being able to take control remotely, unless they are future-RC train-robot thingies.

5. Also, if there is ever a towing feature in Arma, this would be amazing with train cars attached to the engines.

Most militaries mainly used trains in WW1-2, and there are no train tracks on Lemnos, so the modder/map creator should then create a special road (rails) that is only 3m wide, then have the train operate like an AI driver and the "Driver" would be like a commander but only be able to "order" the train backwards or forwards and only drive down the center of the "road". Boom. I don't think this is a valuable feature for VANILLA Arma, but it is possible to do with the platform. It's all up to the community.

How the "flinch" works is that the player / AI rag dolls for a split second. It's a terrible system, because with the Arma 3 rag doll physics the hips tend to suddenly tighten up causing the bodies to sort of 'jump' when they are shot... It's really freaky. If I knew exactly why, I would make a ticket but I don't.

Atomic explosion?

The new sling loading feature is amazing. Now if we can get the ability to tow...

Are you sure you aren't fatigued? That really adds to weapon/binocular sway. I do agree that binocular sway is too much, but weapon movement is what it looks like for me in real life.

Have you ever broken a chemlight? Glowing fluorescent shit gets everywhere. :P Upvoted

That would be nice. It could probably be finished in a week, but I'm guessing not till after release.

Press alt to look around. Get Track IR for realism.

Good for pilot training. Practice makes perfect :P