I think that you shouldn't be able to just jump in be combat ready. After landing you have to get out of the parachute, maybe pack it, but im almost certain that nobody will just land and fight with the parachute on his/her back.

I think that the landing can be improved, but not in the way you suggest it.

It's a duplicate of this bug - 0016456 (http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=16456), please monitor that.

Been able to reproduce countless times, has made it almost impossible to use this helicopter online for transport.

Duplicate.

Got the same problem, figured out if you turn the engine off completely and there is ZERO rotor movement you do not break the helicopter.

Best guess would be disembarking sends the played hitbox through the rotors causing the damage.

Issue reproduced on dedicated and self-hosted server.

fixed

I thought about something, what if the AH99 blackfoot had different profiles? with that I mean a profile made as a stealth/scout helicopter (the one ingame) and another made as an attack helicopter with more firepower (So it can face Mi48 kajmans easily).
https://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/rah-66--mission-image17.jpg

@AD2001 the Mi-8 is a placeholder, as I asked before:

''Any ideas/suggestions regarding the CSAT Heavy transport helicopter? Nato could have the V22-osprey, and AFF already has the Mohawk.''

Mi-17? Kamov ka-60 is designed to replace the mi-8, but what about the Mi-17?

About the AAF having superiority fighters and attack helicopters, although being a small country they have a very complete army, but they don't have any AA vehicle neither a air superiority aircraft, so that's why Air superiority fighters would come to be useful here. Same for attack helicopters as they could be armed with AA missiles, or at least being able to face other attack helicopters and ground units.

Maybe a modified version of the Mil-Mi 35 could be an option since many countries have these, and by 2035 it should have some upgrades.And AAF seems to have NATO/CSAT mixed stuff too.
http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs23/f/2007/336/e/0/OI_36A_Burun_Attack_Helicopter_by_AC710N87.png
http://artfiles.alphacoders.com/503/50351.jpg
Maybe the superhind, as they already use It in toh:
http://helicopters.takeonthegame.com/full/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/TKOHhelicopterARTWORKS_HIND_SuperHind1.jpg
http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2012/233/1/5/mil_mi_24_superhind_mk5___krokodil___heavy_gunship_by_prokhorvlg-d5bynej.png

The other reason for this would be multiplayer, I remember playing warfare gamemode, and I would like to see this in Arma 3, AAF has huge disadvantages as it is right now, so that would lead to unbalanced situations if AAF players had to face NATO and CSAT factions, and I would like to see AFF vs NATO vs CSAT matches, and every faction having a vehicle with the same role, despite the ''unbalanced'' differences in armament and design that they might have.

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!

I never understood why the AAF have their hands on british equipment, even if its old, as the UK were having covert ops against them.

Thank you guys for valid disscusion, please feel free to go on, your ideas are highly valued!

The only problem i have with this list is Duped vehicles, and, wrong place of origin for factions. Example, the C-130 is in there twice AND I doubt CSAT would use them. CSAT should get either Russian, or Chinese made Equipment. Spot on with the Eurocopter Tiger, however, AAF would be better fitted with a JAS-39 Grippen.

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.

i think BIS should have added them as the greek forces instead.

@DarkSideSixOfficial Nice feedback.

I decided to give CSAT the Chinese blue whale instead of the C-130.
changed the AFF Eurofighter typhoon for the JAS-39 Grippen.
Any ideas/suggestions regarding the CSAT Heavy transport helicopter? Nato could have the V22-osprey, and AFF already has the Mohawk.

*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.

@AD2001 good points thanks for your post :) , but I'm ok with that differences, these give each faction a bit of personality. What happens is that there is a lack of vehicle roles in each faction, and that is what is unbalancing things.

for example:
Attack helicopters: NATO has the AH-99 Blackfoot, and CSAT have Mi-48 Kajman , sure they might be different form each other, but they have a vehicle that fulfills that role. my question is, where is the AFF Attack helicopter? I suppose devs are going to add it in a future patch, but in case they did not consider it, here is the request to let them remember. (Maybe eurocopter tiger?)

About the Light transport/attack helis and Medium transport helis, I think it is balanced as it is right now, although NATO ones are more specialized for each role:

NATO has AH-9 Pawnee, which cannot transport troops, but can give light/medium air support. Then the MH-9 hummingbird has no weapons, but can transport some troops. Then NATO also have the UH-80 ghost which has 2 miniguns at the sides, and it is able to transport more troops than the MH-9 hummingbird.

CSAT PO-30 and AFF WY-55 Hellcat are a mixture of the AH-9 Pawnee attack capabilities and the MH-9 hummingbird/UH-80 Ghost transport capabilities. Despite that, I would like to se a MH-9 hummingbird kind of aircraft for CSAT and AFF, so at least this way they would have more than 1 transport and recon helis.

''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?).''

Not sure about that, I don't remember either the AFF tank characteristics, the MBT52 Kuma. also there is a new version of the NATO tank.

''Heavy transport helicopters - Only AAF has them (at the moment?).''

I hope is only at the moment as you say, I would like to see the return of the MV-22 osprey as a NATO heavy transport helicopter, not sure about what the CSAt could have. Any ideas?

''Jets - Only AAF has them, at the moment.''
Check the last Arma 3 update, 2 CAS aircrafts have been added:
A-164 Wipeout (futuristic A-10 http://www.armaholic.com/forums.php?m=posts&q=17185 )
To-199 Neophron (Reminds me of the su25 frogfoot)
I think they should add 3 more that were specialized in dogfighting though. (CAS/AA)

AA and arty vehicles - Okay, they're completely the same, just mounted on a different chassis. NATO does have an MLRS, though.

Well that's unbalanced too:
Artillery:
OTAN: M4 Scorcher
CSAT: 2S9 Sochor
AFF: NONE

MLRS:
OTAN: M5 Sandstorm MLRS
CSAT: NONE
AFF: NONE

AA vehicles:
OTAN: IFV-6a Cheetah AA
CSAT: ZSU-39 Tigris AA
AFF: NONE

the other thing I missed a lot in this game are the cargo transports such as the C-130, there aren't any cargo transport to deliver supplies yet. That's why I suggested the V-44 Pelican for OTAN, I have no idea which ones could CSAT and AAF have though.
http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?166008-WIP-VTOL-Tiltrotor-Aircrafts

Weapons seem to be alright.

Feedback is not to suggest vehicles, BIS wanted this to be a more mainstream game, so everything is balanced, they will never make one side get the realistic stuff.

Are you stupid or just trolling?

Welcome to ArmA 3!

Lack of features and big gamechangers incluided! :D

After some significant further testing, I have discovered the problem is caused by a mod (Arma 3 Map Pack) and not Arma 3 itself. I posted a comment on its page on Armaholic with an updated bug report (http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=23863&d=45#comments).

Realized the logfiles were turned off, tried to edit this to add a "real" log file, can't edit that part of the report >.<

I see .rpt files only. .bidm and .mdmp files were not created? This files should be on same place like .rpt files.

Here it is: http://wikisend.com/download/321306/Arma%203.rar

We need dxdiag and files from this folder for solve your problem. C:\Users\<Name>\AppData\Local\Arma 3\
Can you upload somewhere in winrar package please?
When package will be smaller than 2,097k, so you can attach here. When package will be bigger, please use some free sharing service and post link here. Thank you.

http://feedback.arma3.com/how-to-user.html.html

It was a custom build mission, and yes i had mods on.

But this has never happend and i had the same mods.

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

Mass-closing all resolved issues not updated in the last month.

Please PM me in BI Forums (http://forums.bistudio.com/member.php?55374-Fireball) if you feel your bug was closed in error.

Changing to won't fix. The problem is that countdown is considered started only when trigger condition evaluates to true, but if triggerTimeoutCurrent is part of this condition (like in the repro), then it is like putting the carriage before the horse.

I've edited the title. The issue here is that triggerTimeoutCurrent actually never equals set timeout since recent trigger "improvement":

• spawn {

_tr = createTrigger ["EmptyDetector",[0,0,0]];
_tr setTriggerTimeout [1,1,1,false];
_tr setTriggerStatements ["true","hint 'TT done'",""];
_time = time + 3;
while {true} do {

		if (triggerTimeoutCurrent _tr == 1) exitWith {player sidechat "TTC == 1"};
		if (time > _time) exitWith {player sidechat "TTC is never 1"};

};
};

The trigger timeout set to 1 second and the result is that triggerTimeoutCurrent is never 1: "TTC is never 1"

still an issue

I have revisited some code I wrote before triggers got "improved" quite recently. Pre "improvement" trigger with timeout set to 10 was counting

-1,
10,
9.5,
9,
8.5...

and not

-1,
9.5,
9,
8.5...

as seen on this vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de3mMKrMFqE

They even claimed it was fixed a while ago. +1

Yes they need to fix this asap.

Ignore my fix, its stupid.

found out this offset was caused by calculation errors, but i have encountered another one, however, it appears only at low angle making it very difficult to get exact data, because i would have to shoot some dozens shell on each 100m mark to get accurate data.

Duplicate of http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=16609

Do you have any mods installed?

Mass-close of resolved tickets not updated in last two weeks.

Should be fixed in next dev branch update.

Works without a server.cfg file only loads and runs fine just can't join it with a server.cfg

Mass-close of resolved tickets not updated in last two weeks.

You don't need a GPS to use UAVs.

Sorry i dont know(

the problem is fixed now after upgrading ma RAM system. the game can use memory up to 2 gig and sometimes I had no enough space so crash happened.
you need to mention minimum system requirments for 4 gig of RAM not 2 gig!

Pleas report only one issue/request per ticket.