If you can't be patient, just go play BF4 and never play Arma 3 again.

It's a modified engine... soo

"But the idea of the your own mic being heard by the enemy is pretty cool idea."

Enemies can already hear what you say if they're close enough.

This should be on the Forums.

This should be on the forums.

"the new update (containing "multiplayer optimalization"++)"

Where did you get that?

Surely they're going to help you when you have that name.

Screenshot?

You can use the cheat to unlock the whole campaign: https://wiki.bisimulations.com/wiki/ArmA:_Cheats

Strange, the link worked a few a days ago.

Reports of this bug are being made every few days. I don't know how hard it is to fix this bug, but BIS should probably hurry up with fixing it.

Working as intended.

I agree that vegetation and the ground need more contrast, but everything else is fine IMO.

Duplicate of #0005996.

C isn't for countermeasures, G is. Also, you can rebind all of them in the config files.

There's a big difference between a mod/addon and a mission FYI.

Have you tried verifying the game cache? Do you have any missions installed that could be causing the problem?

It says that you haven't added any mods, not missions.

Or people who disagree.

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?149636-Development-Branch-Changelog/page20

Why don't you just look at them yourself?

14-01-2014: "Added several safety checks to prevent unnecessary AI calculations"

15-01-2014: "Merged and used some optimization of collision detections from DayZ"

Nope, can't see any optimization.

14-01-2014: "Fixed: Crash caused by wrong vertex data in specific objects"

15-01-2014: "Mk20 rifle has correct zeroing steps of iron sights"

16-01-2014: "Fixed: 3rd person mortar view
Fixed: MLRS not shooting at given position
Fix for low skill AI turret gunners shooting at impossible-to-hit targets
Fixed: Possible issues with cinema border function being called badly"

17-01-2014: "Swimming soldiers stop levitating / swimming on land
Fixed: Creation of duplicate post process effect handles after saved game is loaded"

Nope, they didn't fix any bugs, either.

"Oh, those BIS guys are idiots! They try to fix crashes and improve performance when they could be giving us eye candy. Shame on them!"

I don't know, but apparently they reduced the damage of satchels AND demo charges because of that ticket.

I remember knocking down trees with a single claymore while the game was still in alpha, so they probably changed something.

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=14849

It's vryoffbtdrummr's fault.

Strange, I thought helmets weren't even rendered in first person.

Could NVGs be causing it?

They removed them because there were issue with overlapping dynamic lights.

Was it the same mission in multiplayer and singleplayer? What were the server specs? How many people were in the server?

Why are you reporting this again?

Are you on the dev build? Can you give us the number of the original ticket?

It's not really good protection. It kicks a lot of clients from certain servers, whether they actually have the game on Steam or not.

This could be an issue with Steam, though.

Overlord? Are you sure you installed the correct program? :P

FFS, at least learn how to spell it properly.

Except for people using Intel and/or Nvidia.

Upload the mission here.

The Mi-48 has ATGMs and unguided rockets. The ATGMs can lock-on onto vehicles, but the rockets can't. I don't see an issue here.

What tutorial are you talking about? What helicopter is it?

Are you serious? Did you expect the helicopter controls to be the same as those in Battlefield?

I suppose by "sitting" you mean crouching, correct?

Is this about accuracy or recoil? Where is sitting in that video?

It's already possible: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?109702-VBS2-Discussion-thread-the-one-and-only/page83

• add infantry/sniper rifle optic with Night Vision only

Try "optic_NVS".

• add some kind of command or parameter to disable Thermal Vision capabilities on optics and titan launchers
• a command that when it is applied to the unit (AI or player), that unit is not able to switch to Thermal Vision anymore

Agreed, but make a separate ticket.

• There is a similar problem with drones (darter, greyhawk, stomper, static autonomous mg/gl, etc). If I disable Thermal Vision on these (with disableTIEquipment command) I no longer have access to Night Vision capability.

Agreed, but make a separate ticket.

Read the How to guide (http://feedback.arma3.com/how-to-user.html.html). It says to report one issue/request per ticket only.

"NV goggles can't see different colors"

http://marinesmagazine.dodlive.mil/2012/03/12/color-nvgs/

What's the point of this ticket?

And moveInCommander.

@FeralCircus

The VBS3 snow isn't built into the weather system. It's scripted and it's only available for certain versions of the game (the Swedish version, I believe).

Because it's already possible. Did you even read the comments here?

FFS, ProGamer, just close this ticket.

This is already possible:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?109702-VBS2-Discussion-thread-the-one-and-only/page83

Except there's not red triangle on higher difficulties.

"i do believe BIS already disabled friendly fire one mines"

When?

I don't think the beeping should exist at all.

Do people actually run up to tanks and place charges next to them in real life?

Can you reproduce this in any multiplayer mission or just in SaMatra's Wasteland?

Mi-8 for the CSAT? Really? Isn't that thing like 40 years old already?

Also, why does everyone think the AAF have to have air superiority fighters and attack helicopters? Their whole country isn't even 300 km2!

Oh, yeah, some of that info is outdated because it's from an older ticket.

IMO AAF shouldn't have any attack helicopters or specialized dogfighting aircraft because they're just a small island country and they already have MBTs. I agree that they should get some artillery and an AA vehicle, though.

CSAT should probably get an MLRS, too.

*sigh* How many times do I have to prove people claiming that everything is "balanced" wrong?

Let's compare all the vehicles, shall we?

Quadbike - Yeah, the same as it's always been.
MRAPs - Some are faster, some are smaller, some have commanders, some don't. I don't see the point of more differences.
APCs (wheeled) - The AAF one has missiles and a 30 mm cannon, the NATO one has a 40 mm and a 6.5 coax and the CSAT one has 2 less wheels (not like it makes a huge difference, though it's easier to disable it with small arms) and a 40 mm cannon with less ammo and without the APFSDS-T rounds.
IFVs (tracked) - The NATO one has very thin armour, while the CSAT one has better armour AND ATGMs. All other weapons are the same.
MBTs - They both have a 120 mm cannon, but the NATO one can carry 6 people in the back, while the CSAT one is smaller and more agile (or is it?).
Attack helicopters - The CSAT one is a flying tank, it has 8 ATGMs, 38 rockets and a 30 mm autocannon. In addition to that, it can carry 8 people in the back. The NATO one is very fragile, has only a 20 mm (pretty much useless the way it is now), 24 DAGRs (which are, AFAIK, supposed to be as powerful as the DARs on the AH-9s, but they can still take out APCs in one hit) and 4 ASRAAMs. It is faster and more agile, though.
Light transport/attack helis - Only NATO has them.
Medium transport helis - The PO-30 and the UH-80 belong in this category. The UH-80 is bigger and has just two miniguns, while the PO-30 has either no armament or 12 DAGRs and a 6.5 minigun.
Heavy transport helicopters - Only AAF has them (at the moment?).
Jets - Only AAF has them, at the moment.
Armed boats - The NATO and AAF have a 40 mm GMG and a 6.5 minigun, while the CSAT one has a 40 mm and a .50 cal HMG.
Uunarmed boats - The same for every faction, I don't see a point in them being different.
AA and arty vehicles - Okay, they're completely the same, just mounted on a different chassis. NATO does have an MLRS, though.

Now, the weapons:
Main service rifles - NATO and CSAT are pretty much the same, though since CSAT rifle uses a bulpup design, it has a higher muzzle velocity. AAF and FIA use a 5.56 NATO rifles, which are weaker than the NATO and CSAT ones.
DMRs - NATO uses a variant of the main service rifle, which has a uses 6.5, while CSAT uses a 7.62 rifle. AAF also uses a 7.62, but with bigger magazines, than the CSAT one.
Carbines - Both use variants of the main rifle.
LMGs - NATO uses a variant of the main rifle, while CSAT uses a 7.62 rifle, with bigger magazines, but a slightly slower rate of fire than the NATO one. AAF uses a 6.5 caliber LMG with bigger mags than the NATO one and around the same RoF.
Sniper rifles - NATO uses a .408 rifle with 7 round mags, while CSAT and AAF use a .50 cal Russian rifle with 5 round mags. All of them are, obviously, bolt-action.
Launchers - NATO uses a guided launcher that can lock-on onto ground vehicles, while CSAT and AAF use unguided RPGs.
Pistols - NATO and CSAT pistols are completely the same, but how different were they in Arma 2? AAF uses a 1911 variant.
Heavy pistols - NATO uses an 11 round .45 ACP semi-auto pistol, while CSAT has a .45 ACP 6 round revolver.
Heavy AA and AT launcher - OK, you got me.

This is everything I can remember at the moment, tell me if I forgot anything.

Are you stupid or just trolling?

What mission were you playing and did you have any mods installed?

Do you have any mods installed?

You don't need a GPS to use UAVs.

Pleas report only one issue/request per ticket.

This just doesn't work with the new attachment system. If you remove, for example, an RCO from an "MX 6.5mm RCO", the MX will still have the same name, even though it doesn't have an RCO.

Is this a feature request or a bug?

Oh my God, nobody ever thought of this!

#0010745
#0011163

There are your links.

I didn't mean to harsh, I was just referring to the meme thingy.

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

Anyway, I think this is a duplicate of #0016618.

English, motherfucker, do you speak it?

Found it. Duplicate of #0016542.

Already reported. Can't find the ticket, though.

What exactly is the point of the screenshot?

Well, it is 2035...

Unable to reproduce. I can destroy windows without any issues.

Unable to reproduce.

Do you have any mods installed?

Okay, it is a missing feature, but it wasn't promised, so you shouldn't have exepected it.

Yes, it is, but you can't say it's missing feature if it's wrong camo.

Yes, it is. They're working on it.

And the jet in the picture has a hexagonal camo, which means it was planned to be used by CSAT before the release.

Try removing all mods and report if you can still reproduce the issue. Otherwise close the ticket.

How about comparing it to the L-159's actual info?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aero_L-159_Alca#Specifications_.28L-159A.29

http://www.zvi.cz/en/products/20-mm-gun-pod-plamen.html

Duplicate of #0002325.

Which mission? Which buildings specifically?

Or, just return the old damage system.

For the love of God, why do you update the ticket so much!?

Confirmed.

Maybe it means they'll bring snow and freezing lakes to Arma 3. ;)

Are you referring to the up-armored variant?

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?132745-Is-Arma-3-authentic/page111&p=2570363#post2570363

Ask zGuba.

You're not really supposed to jump there.

Could you make a video of how the current destruction looks like and explain what would be "satisfying" for you?

Duplicate of #0001362.

There's a really good game that I think is just for you, it's called Battlefield 4.

Delete your feedback tracker account and go play it now!

The reviving is a 3rd party script, BIS didn't make it, so they're not responsible for it.

Also, Arma 3 is a simulator, if you don't want realism, then don't play it.

You can already access the inventory as a passenger. You shouldn't be able to access it as a gunner, driver or commander.

Are you using any AI mods?

Why don't you close it then?

Read the description of the video.

"EDIT: Rumors are that ARMA 3 Alpha has not incorporated TOH flight models so the information contained in this video may not be accurate concerning that point"

FFS, people, why do you keep mentioning balancing?

Do you like ProGamer coming here and explaining how Arma doesn't need artificial balancing and how he and the other elitists don't want artificial balancing?

And when someone puts up a reasonable argument on a ticket he posted about "all the factions being the same", he just closes the ticket without a response.

I don't care about balancing, not one little bit.

ProGamer, on the other hand, does...