Some extra info : It happens with the Arma3 respawn module and BIS_fnc_addRespawnPosition. The auto scrolling happens most of the time when using the respawn respawnTemplates[] = {"MenuPosition"} option. The menu jumps continuously between spawn points and random selectors. Like a key is stuck. This is the same / related issue to auto movement and stuck in movement. As soon as you respawn the character model continues to move on it's own accord.

This issue and a multitude of related issues have been reported for over a year now and they just get closed by the BIS dev team as resolved or too minor to bother with! This auto scroll/run move issue has not been resolved just look at all these related tickets marked closed! And there are a lot more but I'm not going to waste my time looking for them because this ticket like all the rest will probably just get closed and deleted with no action!.

Is anyone at BIS actually reading these tickets?! Nice to know how much time we are wasting! It needs attention urgently!! Personally I would fire a few people at BIS because of this. It's total BS! I for one have better things to do with my time than wasting it, beta testing your game for you! I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this.

Ticket Status Description
0000125 closed Character keep walking forward until 'step over' used
0003594 closed Stuck running -- can't shoot or anything
0006892 closed Character continues walking forever
0002478 closed Auto run
0007048 closed My charactor moved on it's own
0007128 closed raising weapon locks player in forward movement
0002229 closed Iron Sights with weapon down while jogging
0007384 closed Rresting weapon+moving causes unstoppable running
0007705 closed Stuck infantry handling
0007795 closed Unstoppable running weapon down for 30 seconds.
0001681 closed Locked to moving
0002076 closed will not stop moving
0008034 closed Character keeps running
0008428 closed Character gets stuck in movement
0005660 closed Character continue walking
0002920 closed On showcase player suddenly start to run automatically
0010895 closed Holding down the weapon, infinite run.
0009600 closed The player keeps his movement and cease to respond.
0002446 closed Player continues to move after raising weapon
0000739 closed Stuck running

You could also Google the issue but since it's tricky to describe succinctly - I think the issue has been buried. Here's one
http://15thmeu.net/forums/index.php?topic=22088.0

Please fix this damn issue! It affects Virtual ammo boxes, respawn and a whole lot of other issues.

I would upload my Arma3 keybinding file but that file type upload is not allowed - apparently.

Personally I think this ticket is more a feature request than a specific issue with AI.

Some additional AI capabilities which you left out - which are really important are:

1. AI repair vehicle (if they have a toolkit and are capable)
2. AI heal teammates
3. AI rearm themselves (I mentioned above)

As far as number 3 is concerned this is far more than "a decorate the game" feature as you mentioned. If AI run out of ammo they are obviously useless.

I agree with most of these. One AI feature you left out which I think is critical is the ability for AI to rearm themselves from nearby - and I stress nearby - ammo sources like dead bodies and crates / vehicles.

Relying on mods to control critical aspects of gameplay like weapon sway and fatigue (and revive for that matter) is tantamount to suicide imo since this issue is at the very core of user enjoyment and experience.

And the bulk of Arma3 users who exclusively play in single player mode do not wish to use mods or want to learn scripting, and frankly I don't think they should have to - simply to make the Arma3 experience enjoyable.

We all know that many mods are incompatible with each other and cause significant performance degradation and instability, not to mention the fact that many mods are buggy (take a good look at the rpt file when many mods are running).

Arma3 regularly takes the blame (unfairly in this case) for poor performance and instability due to this issue. Mod reliance is a double edged sword, with one blade slightly duller than the other.

That is why I support the suggestion that core gameplay aspects like fatigue and sway be hard coded with the additional ability to adjust these settings to allow for added flexibility at both server and or client level.

And like mickeymen and Renz mention above - these settings can easily be LINKED to player skill levels. In MP a server admin could therefore set the minimum skill level for their server. Users would therefore be familiar with gameplay restrictions based on the skill level required. A high skill level would for example have more realistic (?) fatigue and weapon sway. Server skill settings should not preclude higher skilled players from joining a server with lower skill requirements and visa versa.

In SP a novice user would for example experience very little fatigue and weapon sway allowing new users to enjoy the experience whilst evolving into experienced players. An experienced player would for example have more realistic fatigue and sway levels.

Again I repeat - it's a futile exercise - trying to prove/disapprove or agree /
disagree with the current fatigue / sway settings in Arma3!

For every one person that agrees there's another that doesn't! We need the
ability to adjust these settings the way we want them and this includes server admins.

It's a futile exercise - trying to prove/disapprove or agree/disagree with the current fatigue / sway settings in Arma3! For every one person that agrees there's another that doesn't! We need the ability to adjust these settings the way we want them and this includes server admins.

@Dr Death - I'm confused you seem to deliberately misread my posts. I am suggesting that since Arma3 has expanded it's user base significantly it needs to become more accommodating for different game play styles. The only reasonable and safe way to do this without alienating parts of it's fan base is to add a means for players to adjust fatigue and sway (maybe based on skill level) to a level that suits their personal needs. This will satisfy everyone.

Relying on mods to control critical aspects of gameplay like weapon sway and fatigue (and revive for that matter) is tantamount to suicide imo since this issue is at the very core of user enjoyment and experience.

And the bulk of Arma3 users who exclusively play in single player mode do not wish to use mods or want to learn scripting, and frankly I don't think they should have to - simply to make the Arma3 experience enjoyable.

We all know that many mods are incompatible with each other and cause significant performance degradation and instability, not to mention the fact that many mods are buggy (take a good look at the rpt file when many mods are running).

Arma3 regularly takes the blame (unfairly in this case) for poor performance and instability due to this issue. Mod reliance is a double edged sword, with one blade slightly duller than the other.

That is why I support the suggestion that core gameplay aspects like fatigue and sway be hard coded with the additional ability to adjust these settings to allow for added flexibility at both server and or client level.

And like mickeymen and Renz mention above - these settings can easily be LINKED to player skill levels. In MP a server admin could therefore set the minimum skill level for their server. Users would therefore be familiar with gameplay restrictions based on the skill level required. A high skill level would for example have more realistic (?) fatigue and weapon sway. Server skill settings should not preclude higher skilled players from joining a server with lower skill requirements and visa versa.

In SP a novice user would for example experience very little fatigue and weapon sway allowing new users to enjoy the experience whilst evolving into experienced players. An experienced player would for example have more realistic fatigue and sway levels.

@gibonez - because Arma has evolved and is much broader in appeal than purely a milsim. And it's a stupid argument to say by allowing server admins or the single player control over these settings will turn Arma into an arcade game!

By giving the user or admin the ability to adjust these settings allows for all tastes.

@Dr Death - suggest you read people's message carefully before responding. I said the diehards seem to be the only ones that support the current system. I did not say most people like the current system.

As you are well aware - the Arma3 player base is now significantly larger than it was - casual players now make up the bulk of the player base. And as you rightly said regarding Arma's roots; A3 wouldn't be in this position had it not been for it's original 'niche' or targeted positioning.

However irrespective of how hard the A3 diehards try to protect the sacred Arma milsim positioning - the game has already moved on, in it's overall appeal and scope. It is a sandbox after all - and as you know some of the modding community seized the opportunity to expand it's appeal and capture some RPG territory.

I am sure BIS has them to thank for broadening A3's scope of appeal and a related increase in sales. The fact is you can make of the Arma3 platform what you will - a milsim, an RPG, a flight sim etc Arma3 is now attempting to cater to all these gaming segments. It must be a very tricky balancing act keeping all these different player segments happy. Perhaps the A3 platform will one day split into different offerings - who knows.

Getting back to this ticket - one has to question why, given the broader gaming style and appeal of A3, does BIS continue to lock down critical default settings like fatigue and sway which are literally game breakers for most?!

Heyvern69 and Mickeymen hit the nail on the head by suggesting that game breaking settings like these should be set server side and/or client side if playing single player. And I would add given the wider appeal of Arma3 they need to add native support for revive and respawn - they need to be simple settings like checkboxes or sliders on the client or server. And obviously keep the revive/respawn scripting functions for mission makers.

It's only by placing control in the players hands that BIS will be able to satisfy more of the people more of the time.

This ticket shows that Arma3 diehards would rather have a game that is highly irritating and frustrating for most people than a game that attracts a wider audience and generates more income for BIS.

Sure there are lots of workarounds to switch fatigue off if you are not playing online. But the fact is now that Arma3 is attracting a wider audience, playing vanilla Arma3 is a highly frustrating and at times annoying process for the majority of people. Couple the over the top fatigue and weapon sway effects to the poor network code and you have the three biggest stumbling blocks for Arma3's growth.

So the big question to the diehards who voted in favour of the current fatigue & sway system - do you want Arma3 to grow in popularity and evolve into a much better game or get bogged down. Because in my mind these 'features' as they are currently executed (Feb 2015) are extremely counterproductive and put the casual player off Arma3.

And before this ignites a whole lot of flames - I've played nearly 4000 hours of A3, a few thousand hours of each of OF, Arma, A2 etc. and fired many real weapons etc. Sure I'm no expert but to me Arma3 needs to find the balance between realism and playability and broad market appeal.

Based on a lot of feedback I've had on the Steam Workshop - there are a lot of people who, shortly after buying Arma3 just give up on the game and or regret their purchase - the primary reasons given - they don't like the fatigue & weapon sway system and the lack of a native respawn/revive option - these 'features' or lack of them are literally a game killer for most.

Everyone I've spoken to wants some sway and a little fatigue but nowhere near where the levels are currently set. The bottom line - BIS will never satisfy all of the people all of the time.

I second the suggestion made above - why not set the defaults much lower in the vanilla game and then add a server side feature that will allow server admins to set these settings the way their users prefer?

This would satisfy everyone and help Arma3 grow at the same time. Hardcore Arma3 players can therefore play on servers where the fatigue and sway are really high for example. Whilst the rest of us mortals can play on servers where these settings are less harsh /realistic?.

I really hope BIS implements this server feature / option it will solve all these issues. Then BIS might be able to get closer to satisfying more of the people more of the time.

Oct 2015 - this issue is still broken.

It would be great if this issue could be resolved - I have a few Workshop missions that are dependent on this scripted capability - i.e being able to force the AI pilot of a heli to switch the searchlight on - via 'player action'. Apparently this used to work about a year ago in Arma 3 - but it subsequently became broken.

Issue seems to have been resolved. I can't reproduce any longer. Please close this ticket.

Issue seems to have been resolved. This issue can be closed please.

Damn that was quick! Well done guys.

Btw I just realized that if the vehicle engine is on when the vehicle is hidden you can still hear the sound once hidden.

This important ticket is now almost exactly a year old! Please BIS - assign this to someone.

Bumping. I think this ticket needs to be given priority! Come on BIS please allocate this to someone.

A few more months and this important ticket will be a year old! A moderator will probably just close soon due to inactivity. I had this happen before. You have to wonder how that works - we the customers go to the trouble of reporting issues and keep the ticket alive - but due to BIS inactivity it gets closed!? Go figure. Well all we can do is hope - and keep annoying them with stupid messages like this one until it gets assigned or we die of boredom.

Confirm still not fixed as of end Jan 2015.

respawnOnStart = 0 has no effect - on start players are spawned at respawn_west or alternative spawn points and not at mission start position.

Would really appreciate it if you could fix this issue.
We can work around it but it's kind of IMPORTANT!

Confirm this issue still exists post 1.26 (yawn). It's now four months since this ticket was created and still no fix. This is a very serious issue and makes mission editing very tricky. I think it's fair to say that all players expect there to be a reliable working respawn (and revive) system in Arma3. And as far as content creators go, we expect a simple reliable method to incorporate this functionality into the levels we make - without this feature breaking our missions every few months when a new patch is released.

Please escalate this issues importance.

This issue also relates to the respawn module and BIS_fnc_addRespawnPosition / BIS_fnc_removeRespawnPosition. It seems if you add a respawn position at startup via any method (module, respawn_west marker, or BIS_fnc) with respawnOnStart = 0 - players are spawned to one of the predefined spawn points as previously mentioned.

The most reliable work around seems to be to delay the creation of a respawn point until post mission start. I'm sure there is a proper work around but since this is a really important issue I don't see why we (BIS customers) should constantly have to find solutions to these kind of problems!

Really wish this issue would be assigned to someone. Don't understand why it hasn't even been reviewed yet. It's a fairly serious issue.

I can confirm as of latest build this function does not set the effects of the live feed.

Four months and no response! I have reported issues going back nearly a year now and they haven't even been looked at - and some are not trivial issues. It's almost like we are wasting our time reporting issues to BIS.

They just mass close tickets because they haven't been looked at! (by BIS!)Go figure. Perhaps we should just stop all the product testing and see if that wakes BIS up.

This causes major issues if you have respawn positions close to each other - since the respawn positions end up having the same 'auto generated name' from the map position The consequence is that the menu position seems to jump continuously from one point to another making it difficult to choose one position. This is a major bug and needs fixing urgently please.

This causes major issues if you have respawn positions close to each other - since the respawn positions (respawn module) end up having the same 'auto generated name' from the map position The consequence is that the menu position seems to jump continuously from one point to another making it difficult to choose one position. The 'name' field in the module is being ignored. This is a major bug and needs fixing urgently please. Relates to ticket 0018467.

Would be great to have this fixed! But I'm not holding my breathe. Probably get closed 'due to inactivity' in 6 months?!

Same problem - if Steam are responsible - BIS should fire them or get compensation! This needs to be fixed immediately. I wasted hours testing for mod incompatibility only to discover that Steam or latest patch was at fault.

Sure I sent one illustrating non-existent mods in folder but ARMA3 showing they are enabled under Expansions.

I wish they would fix these animation issues. Good example of how difficult it is to manage the animationState using playmove, playmovenow, switchmove is to try creating a simple carry / drop sequence - (used by most revive scripts) - and synching these animations in MP - is a major pain and near impossible to get a reliable and decent effect.

Ok thanks, that explains things more clearly. You can understand why many users are confused by it's presence and missing Skirmish init.

Misc -> Skirmish trigger is still there with no explanation of how to use it without Skirmish init. Why is this still in the modules list then?

And why are modules removed without any concern or explanation - given all the missions created with these modules?

I still don't understand - on the one hand you say Skirmish has been removed and replaced with the Site module and then you say that Skirmish trigger has been retained in the modules because it's needed for starting a Skirmish?! The link you posted simply says that Skirmish has been done away with in favour of Site modules. So why is Skirmish Trigger still there and how do you use it given there is no info in the editor.

Sound is very general? Sounds like a euphemism. The issue here is why should we? It's not like ARMA3 is that new anymore. And sound is one thing that could be fixed relatively easily with some effort.

I've been playing with some ARMA3 sound mods - Speedofsound and JRS something or other. They both are a big improvement but still a long way off. Anything would be an improvement over the vanilla sounds in the game. Given sound is such a critical part of the imersion process why doesn't BIS fix this? Are they expecting the community to do all the work for them? Most of the sounds in ARMA3 are so basic they kill the game for me.

@B00tsy - before just spouting off maybe your should check your facts first. Currently it seems we can target certain lights like street lights but not the lights in the Airport buildings.

As indicated we either need a module to toggle lights in a demarcated area so we can simulate a black out or have the ability to toggle the lights in certain buildings. Airfields are critical areas for mission builders. This has a duplicate ticket 0013489.

@Pesoen so let me get this STRAIGHT. You are saying that a virtual catch 22 of sexism and oppression would be created if BIS adds female characters that are able to be undressed - like the male characters in Arma3.

As you know Arma2 has had female character models for some time, and from what I understand, Arma2 is still doing really well. More importantly I haven't heard of a single case of "sexification" as you put it - in Arma2. I might be a little out of touch with mainstream 'sexification' so correct me if I'm wrong.

Sure certain deviants that play Arma3 could spontaneously remove their female clothing whilst on a public server and create an international virtual incident. There is clearly a risk of this happening.

Perhaps once Arma3 releases this feature you should immediately logoff the server you are on. Then start a private game with rogerx and Dr Death so that you guys can continue this weird fascination you obviously have with female avatars in the privacy of your own private server. In this way Arma3 can continue without the risk of implosion.

@Dr Death - not cool! You deliberately put quotes on that comment to pass it off as a BIS statement. From what I have read from the BIS developers they are expanding and recently employed a lot of new talent - so I think the reverse is now true they have the resources to add female civilians and potentially female soldiers. This is a necessary requirement if nothing more than to make civilian life more realistic than it is now.

@Dr Death - you are kidding me is that a formal BIS reply to this issue - can you post the link please. I am going to take this issue further.

It's a pity that some Arma3 players are so socially maladjusted, biased and bigoted. Over two thirds of the 1,900 votes on this issue vote for the inclusion of female characters and this includes female civilian models which will obviously be very useful for mission makers. (Incidentally the vote count for only female civilian models would probably be significantly higher).

So rogerx this 'bug' as you prefer to put it is not concluded. On the contrary in fact, the need for female characters is clearly there and the bulk of the people have voted for this feature to be added in future releases of Arma3.

And you can continue to spout forth until you are blue in the face - the bottom line is the Arma community has spoken and you aren't going to change the outcome.

vlad_8011 and rogerx perhaps you guys should get together and play a really manly game of Arma3 together - you seem well suited.

@rogerx - I thought you already did ;)

I thought this was an issue tracker not a personal forum for certain people to dominate and show their ignorance, bias and how socially maladjusted they are.

@simp1y@hotmail.co.uk - basically this sums up the issue. Well said. Having numerous mods to 'patch' the game's missing content just doesn't work - currently.

Jeez reading the majority of these posts I feel like I just lost 3 minutes of my life! Could we all agree that adult female and boy and girl civilians are needed? This would make the towns a little more believable and if I remember correctly that's what we are trying to do - make ARMA3 as realistic as possible. The debate about the need for female soldiers can wait imo. Of course once we have female civilians what's to stop them occasionally picking up a gun........

The 2 images show a vehicle with 2 missing tyres - once repaired the tyres appear sunken into the surface.

This is a major bug and needs to be fixed!

Hello Bohemia - anyone out there?

When is this issue going to get fixed - it's a serious issue so why has it not even been looked at yet? It completely breaks the game and any mission you are making. And sure I could find a work around - but why should I have to?

Ok so basically who cares if this breaks the game.

What is there to debate about this? Status 'reviewed' is like saying we looked at it and decided it's not a bug it's a feature!

In addition the AI players sink into the ground as they are dragged around by their parachutes. Note this only happens when AI is grouped to player as far as I can tell.

Given that we are now way past final release date this should have been fixed already - its a major bug! Come on Bohemia - you can't expect your users to fix your code.

As far as fast roping is concerned the RAV Lifter mod has fully functional ropes and animation. Fast roping used to work reasonably well but apparently the recent DLC has broken it and Raven appears to not be supporting or developing it anymore. So this feature is for me a must have. We just need to push this as a priority. If you agree vote. Upvoted +1000

Yep it would also be nice if there was some basic lighting on the informal airstrips. It would also be nice if all building lights were on - on the main airports.

Good point the taxi waypointing isn't good. Try creating an ambient airtraffic taxi takeoff loop using land or land at - the AI on most airfields just land and then cut across the runways and head directly for the entry point of the runway they ignore any taxiways before taking off again. In most cases they either get damaged or stuck. Would be great if there were proper taxi takeoff land taxi takeoff waypoint loops. In particular we need park waypoints. If you give AI a get out waypoint at the airfields they just leave the plane in the middle of the runway which obviously isn't ideal.

Fixed in latest dev build.

Stratis still needs blue taxi lights as of Dev build 1.09.
Altis has been fixed - thanks!

And now after the 'big fix' of 27 Sept both airfields don't have taxiway lights!
One step forward and another back.

@AD2001 I'm not sure what game you are looking at but Stratis taxi lights have not been resolved in the latest dev build. Altis yes Stratis no. Taxi lights are the blue ones that show the path from hangars to runway.

Please check your facts before posting.

I know about fireplace burning, smoke and chemlights. None of which are ideal for marking the airfield. The burning oil drum used to be in ARMA2 but I cannot find it in ARMA3. What ever lighting we use needs to be visible from a minimum of about 500m.

No arming, no refueling, no repair in ARMA3 - great! None of these features work correctly. Only solution is to get another vehicle - which is hardly practical in the middle of a war!

We need a rearm module! I'm not sure how I triggered it but I saw a whole page of support options - which worked briefly but I haven't been able to bring that Support menu up again. It said work in progress - so I guess the support feature is in the bulging pipeline - if you'll excuse the pun.

Of course the community has numerous support scripts out there but I for one am getting damn tired of having to add 100's of addons just to make ARMA3 function well.

It's improved considerably. There is a still an issue with regards to path finding to the Inn gardens/gazebo on both Altis and Stratis.

AI do eventually find their way to the stairs leading into the Inn gardens/gazebo.

So I personally don't think it's worth spending time on - please close if you agree. Thanks for checking this issue out in any event.

Issue has been fixed.

Looks like this issue has been fixed in latest dev build.

Agree ! We need more official working sea assets.

@AD2001 - not sure what your point is. Are you saying that we are expecting too much from BIS?

@gutsnav - that's very cool - just goes to show what the community can do - and begs the question why isn't this functionality in ARMA3 if complete outsiders can do this kind of thing?! I would be happy if we could just walk on the trawler!

Yes one would think that BIS could at least make a few larger ships driveable - particularly considering how few assets there are in ARMA3. The community can't be expected to fill in all the gaps! The recently ported Nimitz adds a new dimension to sea missions - we need more official working sea assets in ARMA3.

@TakeHomeTheCup Nope they have to be grouped with the unit they are to follow. Ungrouped units do not follow. Grouping also applies to unit1 dofollow unit2 and commandfollow. Based on the grouping dependency these commands and the follow waypoint have limited application.

There is a 'follow' waypoint type in Arma3 - but it doesn't appear to work. You can use commandfollow or dofollow commands. Alternatively you could use a join waypoint and synch to the lead group. But first prize is getting the follow waypoint type to work.