Sweet it doesn't say anything about affecting the bullet trajectory, but yeah slightly affects the aim, as does using up your stamina, or holding your breath too long, do how i is it any different from simulating stress?

Dale seems to get it... Like really get what this is about.

Sonic, you should maybe go back to CoD, because your argument above sounds like something a lot like CoD.

Loki, we come back to the argument that a person sits behind a monitor/tv so they cannot experience the effects of that situation, they can still okay fearless because, tough shit, they can respawn. In that case AI aren't worried either because they simulate what most seem to do behind a monitor.

Now what syn says, organized event, and no respawn, we discussed that earlier in the thread, yes that works, but because of no respawn, or excessively long respawn times people would most likely value their virtual selfs more. But as someone mentioned, make it an optional module in mp.

Say what?

And once again jumping to the blur? Did we not establish already that we skipping past the blur to use other creative methods?

Laywiin said: "If we can supress the ai, Im all in! when i get shot at in arma, i get in cover."

Samnicho said: "Because if you shoot at AI when others are trying to move up they just continue to shoot regardless of all the bullets hitting very close to them when you're trying to suppress so your guys can move up."

So it's okay to suppress AI because they dont react to incoming rounds, and they should, but when human players do the same (not necessarily you, but you do get alot of those), if they dont react to incoming rounds, then it's okay???

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=20230

looks pretty good, it's an effect and it seems to give a good feel to it.

If you read the description, you would realize the suggestion has nothing to do with blurring any more, and it also does not suggest any blinking grenades or sniper Scopes.

Updated the post with better description

@Oldy
It shouldnt mess with your control more than average gameplay does, it's not that it affects you directly as much as it affects your in game character. I suppose there are two ways, one being affecting the player and one being affecting the virtual ingame character.

@Bogey
I agree with that, it would make a much bigger impact, a bit more intimidating, and probably end up covering your screen to which it would be no different from having a blurred screen, but how much resources would it require from your computer?

how would you suggest to enhance the experience? Seriously I am saying it should be done my way, but give another suggestion that CAN work without a mechanic workaround?

And for god sake please dont say the mere fact that bullets coming your way is enough, because the mere fact that you can respawn just renders that argument completely useless.

I must disagree still unfortunately, i still feel its necessary and that's just how myself and a good few others feel. I'm not saying a player should be suppressed when bullets land 2m away, but less than a meter? With an lmg its hard to place exact pin point shots, and in game less than a meter is like 100 meters for a player... You miss the point of fear and panic. Besides it doesn't have to be a blur effect, it could be something like degrades accuracy equal to that of being out if breath, it could be the sound of impact in bullets near the player overwhelming all other sounds etc. doesn't have to be blurred screen, but i feel it must have some impact to simulate stress and panic.

Nope, no fear what so ever. I have more fear of getting shot on a paintball field than I do in this game. Thing is, I dont give two sh#ts about my kill death ratio, and the mere fact that I can just respawn 10min away within seconds also doesnt worry me much at all.

This attitude is not just me, there are many more out there with the same attitude, and it is this attitude that is a big reason why we need it. Because there is no real reason to worry or fear death, so people play risky, which is really not realistic in any way, and the worst is, because there is no actual way of balancing it, it ruins the game for others.

So, as an example, read Arkod's comment: "There were times when I was being shot by 2 LMGs from long range, they couldn't kill me because of low of accuracy of LMGs at long range, but I could return accurate fire using a 7.62 rifle (MXM)."

Now if you add this effect, it will put those persons exposed (Arkod) in a disadvantage, and knowing that they are at a disadvantage would know that taking a risk like he did to be fruitless, and would stand a better chance running for cover, at which point suppressive fire would not have much of an impact any longer, regain he's nerves, and plan a way to get away or fight back.

And it goes without saying that in that example, he did not panic. Most hardcore AmrA players are exactly like this, and it is just a game, they can respawn with a vengeance. In reality, even the most badass soldiers will experience these crippling emotions, because it is real life or death, no respawns.

So understand that I am not saying this effect is meant to be completely realistic, it is meant as a work around, kinda like what zooming in on your sights is a workaround in the game, I don't hear people bitching about it.

oldy explain how it will impact YOUR gameplay then if you already duck for cover when supressed? Because this isnt intendid to bog you down if you play as you claim to play, it only will impact those who dont. So i see no frustration and I see no problem for you, or any sense in what you are saying, unless you are one of those CoD players.

As far as immersion goes, i would like to see the FOV change to around 100 by default or more, and no "zoom" when aiming down the sight, because that really just breaks the immersion, also no option for third person, and no indicators that you are actually hit, because the mere sound of bullet impact into flesh should be enough, why simulate pain? see where I am going with this? Only an idiot or a CoD kiddy wouldn't -_-

"Getting shot at doesn't impact your aim, it does however think twice before popping out of cover to take a shot."

Firstly, getting shot at does impact your aim, as you will be experiencing fear and adrenaline etc. These emotions and chemical reactions does have an effect on your overall performance on the field. Telling me soldiers do not experience any of this is and they are emotionless robots is only bullshitting yourself, regardless how brave some soldiers are, they are affected by it. I have watched alot of soldiers reactions in combat watching documentries, and I can assure you, they are shit scared most of the times compared to hollywood action hero's.

Secondly, supression effect shouldn't impact the player taking cover, once you take cover and feel safe you should recover from the negative impact of the mechanic. Hence why this effect and mechanic should force anyone to find cover. I never intendid for the effect to overwhelm any player behind the safety of sturdy cover. so in that regard it will make anyone think twice again before popping their heads out.

anyway, it is easy for anyone to sit behind a monitor and make claims that this is unneeded, because the fact of dying one shot is enough to discourage anyone, but no player will ever understand, on a real battlefield, you die with no chance of respawn, in the game you still get that chance, even if it sets you back 10min of flying. So naturally, people will take chances they otherwise never would in reality, breaking the whole idea of simulation right there, hence the need for work arounds.

argue all you want, but it seems half the community at least agrees with the need for a mechanic, especially now with the fearless CoD action kids out there who dont know what suppression fire is, it doesn't need to specifically be blurring of the screen, it just needs to be a mechanic that works, and puts more value on being a support gunner.

Bashka, you sound like a hardcore arcade shooter player now if you have no idea what suppression fire is, and what it's intended for.

Suppression fire has nothing to do with God damn accuracy, you deserve a face palm for that sir. So go fly a kite and let the gentlemen talk.

Long range or not, there's a difference between shoot to kill and suppression fire you idiot, of course a sniper has the advantage, but only if he's position is unknown, if he's position us known, and he gets suppressed, a sniper wouldn't be able to shoot for sh#t, thats assuming he does take the risk to stay and keep shooting, at which point he's nerves will be noting like normal... That's reality, not Flippen arcade.

Thanks Arkod for that brilliant example. That is exactly the point of my request, and it happens allot. At long range, unless you are dealing with a sniper, there hardly is any fear of being hit, and it is so simple to just turn around and shoot the suppressor with hardly any effort, and fact is, if the gunner isn't aiming to hit, but suppress instead, then it is just frustrating, and 9 times out of 10, i am that useless gunner due to poor simulation.

It is easy for people to say the meer fact that you can be killed easy in ARMA will make you duck and dive for your life, but i have seen plenty hardcore vets just turn around and and shoot a gunner or sniper with ease.

Soldiers are human, and have fear, and do experience physical and emotional difficulties, they aren't inhuman robots, so they virtual character needs to be effected in the way a lazy arse player can't be affected.

And Lonewulf made a good alternative, I'd even vote for that. This isn't about mimicking battlefield, it's about bringing purposeful mechanics to the game.

Okay let me remove the bf3 part, and just refer to ACE mod with reference to attached images, i only used bf3 as an example because more people are familiar with it than ACE mod =/ maybe that was my mistake.

Well go figure, I have it then. And it seems to work just fine.

I dont think MS Paint is really capable of adding the blurred tunnel vision effect, I wouldn't know, haven't really got any experience with it. So there goes that theory, and my stock GTX660 is performing pretty fine for a 3month old GPU so I doubt it is that either, and as for the mod, I can play on other ACE related servers and match compatability, sooo I dont know then hey,

But I have it. Little particle debri, dust and all. The full monty... Maybe it is a new feature added later? Who knows =/ but I have proof and it's up there. If i could do video recordings I would upload a video just to prove it.

But anyhow, I enjoy it, and it seems almost half the voters agree, so will see where it goes in future.

"Ya, sorry you're full of shit there.... =/

I just opened up ACE to see if MAYBE you were right and I just forgot. 3 Infantry squads firing at me as I ducked behind a rock, and no blur. No visual change whatsoever. I checked modules to see if it was an option there. Again, no."

Well then i dont know, I just went into ArmA2 running my ACE mod, and played Hike in the Hills, to see if maybe it was just my imagination, however here is my result. I managed to get the result twice in a 5min game. see the screenshot I attached to ticket for proof. This is what I am referring to, and it is done in the Advanced Combat Environment. Also if you play as the gunner, you get a similar effect, and also a transition of deafening if you just let rip.

I do not know what ACE mod you run if you do not get this effect, perhaps it has to do with Post Processing effects, and you have yours low or off. I have mine on normal though.

So take back your comment =/

And FYI, it isnt necessarily BF3 inspired, I only used BF3 as an example because from my knowledge, I do not know many people who actually play with ACE mod, let alone even know what it is abbreviated for. So BF3 was a better choice since everyone plays that and everyone will know what I am referring to.

Exactly... And i am sure i mentioned this feature could be based on difficulty, for the expert players, can turn the feature off. So still, why is this a big deal? Even the all realistic ACE mod had this feature in =/

I'd say 5 min should be the starting time limit, with no spectating view.

But anyhow, back onto topic, given the game already has virtual indicators such as crosshairs, faint red screen hit indicator, a HUD, and so many other things that represent work around to indicate to the player things that they just can't experience otherwise, i don't see why this is such a big deal, nobody is complaining about those things that really just do break the "reality" barrier, and yet this does?

Yes sure, i agree 100% with that, but how do you suggest they implement that? Id say rediculous long spawn time, but then it would just make people join another server, because its quicker to get back in action, dayz had permadeath, which added to the concept of not wanting to die,.so really, how would you suggest they implement that, because that mind set would really enhance the way people play.

In Solo play its easy, just have no check points, play an entire mission without dying, and start over if you do, but now let's stick to pvp mp...

Lol thanks MadDogX =) much appreciated!

I could agree with that partially, although i always play with maximum FOV which is 90 i think for maximum awareness, don't know why ARMA doesn't have that by default, But yeah perhaps not completely blur the screen, maybe just create a tunnel vision effect for heightened focus on the shooter, and perhaps slightly add more sensitivity to mouse movement temporarily to simulate adrenaline and reflexes?

Well see i find it useful, it affects me, as well as my targets from my experience, which is exactly why i am requesting it. So far it has always worked the way it should and i think people just pissed off because it has a direct effect on them, hence my statement that you are all arguing about it because of it. Really if it didn't work out like you guys say it doesn't, i wouldn't suggest it. So calling me out on idiotic logic really doesn't help anything.

To this i say, you agree or you disagree, just vote and let majority decide. I won't mind which ever way it goes, because majority rules right? So you can stop with the bad attitude.

You miss my point here, i don't mind someone returning fire, i do mind though that they can with ease and no stress or fear. Besides, suppression isn't 100% effective and doesn't make one untouchable, but it does help enforce the effect.

If you disagree with it, vote down, if it has no effect on you, then great, it wouldn't be a problem to you if it is featured in game, so i really don't see why you making such who hah over it

I agree with the long redrawn times myself, but that too isn't even a factor in the game. But it isn't "fake",.it is just a work around. Problem is this is a game, and as realistic as it tries to be, it can't simulate everything perfectly. So hence work around like these become useful. The point of this effect is to aid in effecting suppression, not just being a fancy effect.

But then tell me,.if my statement is such a joke, then why are some of you so anal about having it implemented? If if a little blur has no effect on your game play in bf3, then it shouldn't have any effect in ARMA, so why be so anal about it Hmmm?

I'm all for authenticity, but some things just can't be simulated in a game, fear, stress, natural body reactions that are involuntary etc. that's where these work arounds come in.

I don't see how, i think it worked out pretty well, doesn't blind the player, but impares visibility which degrades accuracy, and does force people to seek cover and recover. That's exactly what i like to see in ARMA.

I swear its only people who don't want to be suppressed and feel helpless in a situation like that who are against it.

I'm not trying to turn ARMA into bf, i do like that it isn't anything like what CoD is, but honestly in my opinion the suppression effect just was a good implementation, because it actually did have an effect and added some purpose to the support gunner.

I really don't see the big deal about it having this in ARMA, unless those complaining just simply don't want to be affected by suppressive fire, and actually want the chance to around and take that risk to take out the shooter, which kinda defeats the point of being a gunner then. And that is
the problem with games, its just a game, and people are likely to take risks they wouldn't in real life. This effect just helps keep people from doing that.

Anyhow, let's just agree or disagree and wait and see what the devs do

Well i still feel this should be implemented. Your argument to say it's not needed is pretty much the same as, you can be shot numerous times, and your body will function 100%, maybe because soldiers know how to deal with it... And though arma3 is pretty much like that for now , I'm hoping they would at least fix that too, but my point being it will aid with the experience and the purpose.

Support gunners don't always shoot to kill, they use the tactics of suppression, and that doesn't always allow for them to get hit makers. So if the victim of suppression just stands up and places a good shot (and being a game, people do take these risks that pay off), they pretty much make the point of suppression irrelevant, and any gunner who shoots to hou isn't really helping in terms of suppression, especially when we talking about more than one target.

Anyway, i feel this will be a good addition, perhaps optional in terms of difficulty

I mentioned squinting eyes, when you are being shot at, and there is impact all around you, there is dust, splinters, glass and all kinds of tiny debri flying around you, which brings a natural reaction to squint your eyes. And even if you are brave not to squint, that dust and debri in yours eyes surely will make your eyes tear up, So it isn't that your eyes just blur for the sake of supression, it has a plausable explanation behind it, but primarily it is a good indication that you are being suppressed. This effect should also apply to smoke too. Could add a tactical advantage to smoke not just for a smoke screen but also to weaken their sight.

This would not happen. To be honest 24-hour time is a lot easier to tell the time than am/pm.

with am and pm, both 12hour times are the same, only the am and pm being the difference, which could be confusing. However with 24hours, you should know anyting within the first 12 hours (00:00 till 12:00) is morning till mid noon, and the last 12hours (13:00 till 24:00) is afternoon till midnight.

So to cap, if it says 09:00 its 9am, and if it says 21:00 its 9pm.

-------------

And I just noticed I had repeated what Polaris said.

i think the trees are probably placeholders for the time being, i know majority look crap, especially the textures, but perhaps it is just temporary placeholders, sure in alpha state they havent completely created the game already.

But i will vote up anyway just to ensure that BIS DO NOT SKIMP on the trees.

Agreed, this will make switching to sidearm for quick response engagement more realistic as you just let go of the weapon to drop to your chest and switch, thus faster switch in and out of different weapons.

I agree with this totally, btw 5645 is mine, but i mentioned it for the AI as well, because suppression is a vital tactic that is used very freaquently, especially against a bigger group of enemies. Both AI and human, and the game doesn't really add much for suppression, its like everyone, even the AI play like chuck Norris =/

Agreed.. I don't get why BIS just don't hire the groups that helped made ARMA 2 more complete with these mods, it should do a great deal to improve the series by giving these guys the tasks to do what they have been. Sure it would cost them, but it would be worth every cent, just up the price for the product, at least we know we will be getting a better deal.

And yes, they can always mod it into the game, but it would never be the same as the features being natively implemented into the game.

Yeah the righteous path.. That's what I'm doing in my owntwisted way, telling this frag person to just read the description and the comments, and then rethink he's vote, if he still disagrees, and provides other input no one else has actually mentioned, then by all means i will be totally cool with that, but honestly, people are suppose to give suggestions and solutions, not crucify anything potentially good, and you are right,getting that into peoples heads, much harder than one thinks.

Oh well, I'm sure I've made my point, will see how this frag person responds, maybe something stuck, maybe not and he's still himself... Either way, I'm done now.

Apologies for upsetting some of the guys and girls

Roger, my comments aren't directed strictly towards you, so don't flatter yourself. My argument isn't against you specifically,.just the general down voters with no good reason beyond bunny hopping. Also you were discussing the origins of bunny hopping, you weren't specific on the genre, so forgive me for not being a mind reader.

My argument against bunny hopping is most recently directed at frag, not you, though you can also defend he's bunny hopping argument if it pleases you. The real problem here is not that I'm an asshole alone, from browsing these tickets i find most of the community are ass holes, you get the ass holes who think the game should be a carbon copy of ARMA 2 and no new features are required, you get the ass holes who debate what really is realistic, and that ARMA is in no way a game, and should not have things such as UI etc,.there are those assholes who think the world revolves around them and that the game should be made in their image and i can really go on about this, but me, I'm the asshole who wants to see ARMA 3 be an improvement, I've played the previous games, i know what i feel lacks and what i want to see come to life in ARMA 3 .and judging by votes, I'm not far off from what majority wants. So its natural that an asshole like me would ask asshole like frag to provide a proper argument on the subject,.which is not what he is arguing about now is it? I see this as sabotage, down voting something useful because of something that isn't even part of the request, and while bunny hopping may be a result of making jumping possible, take note of all the comments and suggestions that work around this fear of b bunny hopping... Now you tell me, if frag read the comments and the description, why is he being so anal about bunny hopping?

To me, the asshole didn't read through it all, thus he is down voting a potentially good feature that has pretty much been resolved theoretically. Hence why this asshole is making a fuss to defend something i believe in. And that asshole needs to read through the ticket,.and if he still disagrees, then provide a reason other than one that has been discussed and some pretty good solutions provided. The problem is, and i bet this is what happened, that frag person read the title of the ticket, not the description, not the comments, and thus he brought up the same arguments many others have, and that many others have also suggested as a means to over come.

So,.I'm not here to get people to like me, I'm here to give input, and just as you don't give a moot about my opinion, i don't give a moot about anyone else, i only care about suggestions and solutions.its nothing personal.

And lastly don't bother commenting about my grammar,.firstly eng is not my mother language, and secondly I'm typing with my phone, and this particular site isn't completely mobile friendly to proof read and fix typos, so while i may be aware of some grammatical issues,.I'm not bothered to frustrate myself to fix something that you can still understand.

Bunny hopping did not first appear in delta force, it started back I'm the day of arena shooters, like quake etc. where bunny hopping actually propels you forward at a faster pace and was an evasive manoeuvre that made it hard to be hit. This is where bunny hopping originated from and with that stuck in many peoples minds, that is why it's exploited. But seriously you guys would really believe BIS would implement bunny hopping?

Besides, once again, read the description of the post, it isn't implying bunny hopping, it's about getting over obstacles, and if you read all the comments following this request, you would likely notice nobody wants bunny hopping and most give suggestions of how to overcome it to make this work. This is a sorely needed feature voted by majority, if you are fine with taking your time to get over an obstacle with the simple step over.

So yeah you can have your shitty narrow minded opinion that is completely irrelevant to the subject at hand, and so can i have my own opinion about your short sighted view on the subject, and everyone else who failed to properly read the description and countless comments, and yet still think that this is all about bunny hopping. I'm just saying, stop being so damn negative about something that is so needed, and yes, so damn realistic. people jump, even soldiers with loads of gear on their backs, even if it is severely limited, but under the conditions of being shot at especially, soldiers can quickly get over an obstacle a lot faster than the current stepping over. That is what most people here are going for, and there other options for jumping too, but really, the bunny hopping argument is getting old, because we all know, and we all work together to suggest ways of over coming that. Now why don't you give any other reason other than bunny hopping why you don't want to see thisfeature in game, then you can have avalid argument.

See nothing wrong? Well i do see yet another comment about bunny hopping, for no apparent reason since the poster never implied any bunny hopping as the reason to this request, and also since everyone pretty much already mentioned bunny hopping, and voiced their concern about it, and suggestions were made to work around it, and yet this guy still continues to bring up bunny hopping... That is what's wrong with he's/her post. Read the posters description, and then read frags last response, where does everyone bringing up the bunny hopping getting the idea that the poster intended this to be about randomly jumping around? When he specifically mentions to get over obstacles in a more realistic fashion? And yeah he's video example is a shitty example but he did mention it was over exaggerated.

Frag, stop bringing up Bunny hopping, it's been mentioned, even by those who want the option to jump, that we do not want Bunny hopping at all, so stop defending against it when it isn't even the intention. Read the comments, there is hardly anyone that disagrees since we all understand that, there has even been opinions about to overcome the Bunny hopping. So don't be narrow minded and keep bringing up the Bunny hopping, the intention is clear, to get over some obstacles in a quicker fashion than we currently have to. This goes to everyone that down votes this, stop bitching about Bunny hopping. But if you really believe that stepping over a small obstacle the way you currently have to, especially under pressure and fire is totally realistic, then fine, so be it, vote down, but don't drag bunny hopping into it, that's just creating negativity around the subject. Also it should be up to the moderators and/or the poster to update this ticket information based on the suggestions and opinions to clarify the request.

I still just want to get over a God damn wall fast as possible ass if i am being shot at... Not ass if i have all the time in the world.

And now we wait...

The gear and weight of gear already affects stamina, so if stamina affeCts the jumping as it does the running, it will work perfectly. Weight of gear will affect height, and stamina will affect how frequent you can do it.

Jumping and climbing is good for getting over obstacles, or getting across obstacles. No matter how seldom its used, it should be there for when opportunities present itself.

Don't mind the down voters, they clearly don't know what realism is.

check this video of Benson who made an animation mod that cover this and some more. Fucking brilliant stuff this, BIS, you need look at this, and impliment this too!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBCszbWFu0Y

Also note, watch 0:48 to 0;50... that still needs to be fixed!

@paravbs

I don't see people jumping 6 feet in the air from nothing more then a relaxed walking pace when a car comes screeching their way, but i have seen it... Its called adrenaline. And for soldiers when under fire, I'm pretty sure they can get over that wall as quick as possible if they really want to, regardless of the weight they carry. Just saying =)

Okay i see your point, in that case offer some form of communication with you, so that I'm the event if the first ticket that was closed, i can contact you and try debate my point. Or allow owner if the ticket to use a feedback back system when call is closed to try and justify why it was made as ticket. I don't mind being closed for being a duplicate, but it had to be am actual duplicate, not just something that sounds some what similar.

As stated, the first ticket you closed, and the ticket you directed nee at, not the same thing at all, making it an unreasonable close. But I'm content now that you pointed at another ticket that was an actual duplicate. So I'm cool with it. And i understand you are busy, and have to deal with so many of these, but if it really is so common, you should make an adjustment to the system, because you are going to make mistakes, how are we going to salvage a ticket from a mistake?

It would avoid these conversations like we having now. Since its the only easy to get your attention, Just saying... But you may clean up the thread and remove this after reading.

That's a very different ticket to what you first closed my ticket for... And yes agreed, that now resembles more what i requested, but dammit i wish you could be more tactful about closing tickets. The first ticket you closed, you could have pointed out the ticket that you claim is duplicate, and wait for feedback, and like the first ticket you closed pointing out to another ticket i would have explained that it is not the same thing.

The second time you closed the ticket, i didn't bother looking at the ticket assuming you are being an asshole to close me down for the same thing. But if you point out to the ticket without closing and asking me to look at it first, i would and i would tell you the same thing I'm telling you now.

Yes, this ticket does resemble what I'm asking for, so yes i now accept my ticket being closed, and i would give you the approval to close mine. Just the way you did it and handled it was just very wrong. You guys decided to let us in and provide feedback, that makes us guests, and should be treated as such. If you not up to listening to us, then why even allow us to give feedback?

I don't mean to be an ass, but i got seriously pissed that you refused to try and discuss it. You can send me an email if you have to.

And don't say use the filter, cuz i did before i created the ticket, and did not find that ticket.

Really Roger? I don't see how it is a duplicate, since that request revolves around climbing onto an object, to lift ones self up onto a ledge etc. in no way does it even come close to describing how to tactfully get over an obstacle safely and quickly.

Pisses me off even more that Maddog doesn't even bother to discuss why i am saying it isn't the same thing, obviously if it was, i wouldn't recreate it and beg him not to close it. But it seems faith in them are lost if they don't even bother to try and understand.

I tried, and well yeah... Guess we will have to stick with this mess if a ticket...

Done!

Created a new ticket specifically aimed at getting over obstacles, this should be easy going on the bunnyhoppingphobics =)

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=7349

*old ticket was closed as dupe, but I recreated it again.

Somehow i get the feeling if i do that, it will be labelled a duplicate. If you read the description of the ticket, it's primarily opposing the shitty step over animation. Hence why i did not make a separate ticket.

I can see this whole post is a mess, but i think it's primarily due to the description requesting two separate things. Perhaps another ticket is required with better description. One for replacing the step over animation, or providing an alternate animation. And another for bunny hopping. Then we would get better conclusion.

I like number 4 there, because the current system is a total contradiction. But vaulting over still is quicker and lower than the current step over.

Good dammit, this stepping over animation is about as bad as the rifle along over the shoulder. It just doesn't belong. I just want a quicker safer way to get over an obstacle without being a sitting duck, or taking the long way around it. That's my purpose for my vote. I'm not asking to be able to jump for no reason at all, which everyone seems to have a problem with. Just wanting something that makes more sense.

see attached screenshot. When defending this post, this is essentially what I am talking about. Nothing fancy, just being able to get over obstacles quicker when running, as opposed to run, stop, step over, and run again. Also could be useful for climbing up over tall walls.

I think perhaps the biggest issue is the OP's video of exagerated jump, as well as the fear of bunny hopping. a Moderator should clean up the description, since they wont allow us to post another thread on the same subject, with a different idea in mind. But hell, if everyone down voting disapproves of the vaulting like in the uploaded pic for a good reason (not including arcadey bunny hopping as an excuse), then I fear this game will turn out in the favour of idiots -_-

Yeah I know about those requests, but they arent exactly "features", they are more alternative ways of improving the core of the game, and for something like that, it would be best done as early in development as possible, which would explain why it is assigned by now =)

But hey, I have no doubts that BIS will look through these requests, and there are a few damn good ones which i sure hope sees the light of day... otherwise i will seriously need to learn to script and mod =/

Okay lets not be negative now, this really is only the alpha, so i doubt they will be looking at these features right away since they want to get the existing core of the product ready, if I am right, we should start seeing the devs assigning some of these feature requests in BETA, which ever is do-able, otherwise I am sure they are making a list of things to add in future exapansions and perhaps even ARMA4.

But lets be positive, at least these posts wont go without notice, I bet many modders read these feature requests and go: "hey, this sounds good and worthwhile, lets try it"... And thus we will see some of our requests come to life in one form or another =)

Because jejn, some people will never be positive about change and evolution, likewise the awesome and sensible tactical pace is disliked.

They want the graphics to get better but the gameplay to remain clunky and old, fearing anything new will make turn it into CoD or BF -_-

Lets just see what BIS does, but as always, there are some awesome people that will make the necessary mods the right way, though I prefer such things to be natively implimented in order to be done right.

Well this is awesome =P but not quite what i was hoping for, i was wanting the jumping and vaulting from the ACE mod =/ oh well, beggars cant be choosers.

Why put pauses between the jumps, just make it based on stamina, and jump will exahaust your jump quickly. jumping infinately with only say 3 seconds apart is not better than doing 3 jumps each 1 second apart and then stamina is up and cant jump until player rests.

keyword is jump, not hop... im sure the devs will understand this

"after seeing dyslexic's video for jumping, i am totally against this. there is literally no way to make this not look silly and ridiculous."

Thats bunnyhopping, note the name of the mod, that is what everyone is against, except the one that posted a link to the mod, but it is not what anyone else in favour of this feature is referring to.

I don't get why people are so negative about this, of course if jumping is implimented it will be limited by stamina as sprinting is. Why all the negativity surrounding this feature?

The way I see it, it's more flexibility, the people that complain it never was in previous ARMA titles, well so was the position adjustment, and it helped ARMA game play become better.

ARMA won't be a fast paced shooter like that, look at the tactical pace and how that was implemented, sure you can now walk and shoot, but accuracy is so crap it really only can be used for suppressing fire. And since that was pretty well implemented, you can rest assured, that if jumping does get the thumbs up, it will be nothing like CoD or BF bunny hopping.

So how about some optimism in the evolution of ARMA, if you really feel ARMA was good the way it was, then stick with ARMA 2,.because it would be pointless if ARMA 3 was no different.

Watch the jumping and vaulting in these vids from the SMK mod, this is what the post is for, and it is what is being referred to, getting over obstacles quicker and more easily than the normal "get over" animation set for V, because the normal animation just breaks your pace and leaves you at a temporary disadvantage. And dont tell me these aren't realistic jumps -_-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nRtA6wrM80
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHEIKCSD__8

Some real vids of army traing where jumping and vaulting seems to be rather intergral part of physical training and abilities. I think BIS could take from this and use it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=PYxKqiSePyM&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo09_qVw4Ko

see how this doesnt really relate to bunnyhopping anyways?

This is a good idea, of course everyone dreads the bunny hopping, but it really can be countered simply by exhausting your stamina, which will stop you from even being able to jump.

For those wanting a solid reason where and how it can be used in game, well jumping and ducking behind a fence, or obstacle that you cant just easily run around, the current animation puts you on disadvantage when having foes behind you, secondly jumping rooftops, now I know there arent any rooftop battles going on in the alpha, or any other arma game, but maybe we just dont see it because there is no feature for it? If there was we might see rooftop chases, we might see propper evasion over debri and obstacles.

yeah please do... I will try the script out and see =) thanks for the proactive solution, if it works as i hope it does, it should suffice. However I am not looking for something that adjusts based on frames, instead a fixed option?

by the way, how do i get this working, tried the steps you are following, not seeing any missions in the editor to choose

added an image, something I had discovered on one of the servers I played. in gmae you have an option to select view distance based on whether you are on foot, in a vehicle (land and sea) or air.

Now I just wish this was actually integrated into the games video options.

okay never mind, got it to work... My God it is near perfect! Just need to tweak more

How can I get this to apply throughout any showcase or MP game I play?

something like this will be great as an OPTION only, but I agree the switching between LOD's is horrid, and I am forced to sacrafice frames by setting terrain, texture and objects quality to very high at the least.

personally I would rather, instead of the quality setting affect the distance at which objects transition (pop in), either create a new transition method thats hardly noticable, or when setting objects and terrain details to high, not transition into higher quality as you approach the object, instead render the object the same infront of you, as it would be 500 meters away. That way there is less overhead anyway, and less popping of LOD transistions. Should be an option too. How about making a script for that?

Well the AI should have something of a brave to cautious slider, the braver ones in such a situation will fire at the vehicle, because in most cases it is boldly stupid, however you maybe even hit the driver, where as some would be more inclined to duck for cover. Agreed it shouldn't be that easy to just drive over all the AI.

Newest version, that is right, but it's still the same engine with the same set of problems. Not a new engine, just a new iteration.

This ticket points out one of the few issues that still haunt every release and every engine update. In terms of graphics, something like this is important, all the other snazzy dx11 stuff wasn't really necessary, this and texture/model popping is way more important!

Oh how i wish this was a new engine! But its not, it's just another iteration of the same engine, with some upgrades. But i would have assumed the upgrades would include fixing these issues.

That mod makes a slight improvement, not a major difference really. But still kudos to the modder for being pro-active!

When will this see the light of day??? =(

Yes, BI now loves people with OCD =P thanks, really happy with this in the BETA, it was a pain to do it in the config files.

"What do you mean with "Crouch instead of crouch"?"

LOL

What he said: "Crouch > Vault > Crouch instead of Crouch > Vault > Standing"

What he meant: from crouch, he steps over, and posture should revert back to crouch, instead of going from crouching, to step over and posture resets to standing instead of reverting back to crouching.

worth voting up really, no point losing control over posture and stance due to something like this, invoulentary actions lead to quick deaths.

YAY to sense =P

Debatable really, i can get out almost just as fast in reality, because i have much more control over my body and actions, for example i can do things faster when under pressure rather than relaxed and consistent like what game animations are. In games you either do things very relaxed, which is awkward in stressful situations (like done games when you take your sweet time reloading when being pinned down) and then if animations are made speedy, then it's awkward during times when things are calm. How do you balance that?

Well honestly it's better to be speedy during calm moments, then to be relaxed during stressful situations which will have you curse at the game for being so slow.

As for getting in f faster with door already open, character gets in the car quick enough as it is,

My point being as it is now, it's fine, though i would like for animated door s, it isn't a necessity unless it has a greater purpose other than looking nice. I would like for doors to serve as cover, but then it shouldn't unrealistically blow up while I'm standing next to the damn car.

As much as it be nice for immersion and eye candy, i won't see the devs tackling the request without good enough reason other than that, besides, having it animated you might end up with people taking too long to get in and out if vehicles due to the animation and that would follow an angry mob most likely. So of course it needs to be balanced, and therefore it needs to have a purpose. Using doors as cover is as great a trade off you can get, and that's what everyone voting this ticket wants, but it will obviously face other issues. Personally i feel doors as cover is almost pointless as a player can still kill you by blowing up the vehicle, even with small arms. even heavy arms are unlikely to blow up a vehicle, just shred it to bits unless you using explosives. So they will need to sort that out, then doors as cover will be practical as much as it is eye candy for the immersion aspect, other wise, as it stands, its fine the way it is because its quick and easy to escape when shit goes down.

Something so simple, and we get animations for different stances but no proper open/close door animations =/ we can already open doors on buildings, this shouldn't be any pain to do.

Have an option to open door, then option to climb in and then close door, sounds like a pain, but if commands are based on priority of order, you would simply need to just hit space bar 3 times to complete that.. If you want to get out quickly just eject, hit space to open door, and getting out would be the next priority, except when still moving, then ejecting will be priority, ejecting should be getting out the vehicle in prone position as if jumping into a roll (physix ragdoll will be nice here) to minimize injury. If you get out without ejecting it would be optional to close door or not.

Besides for a more complex realistic approach and eye candy, it will benefit mainly for one thing. Cover when exiting a vehicle, but it would be useless if vehicles still blow up from a few rounds in engine block. because cars are already one of the worst places to seek cover in a fire fight as the explosion will kill you. Also will be useful for flexibility if shooting from within the vehicle, but once again, relies on another ticket. So if these other tickets don't get done, then this request would become utter useless, and be just for looks and show and serve no purpose other than keeping the devs from doing other important stuff.

I think a moderator should add relationship to the other tickets that would compliment this suggestion and make it worth while.

Join a realism unit, or do what me and my mates are doing, start a realism squad housing your own private server and invite other ARMA enthusiast squads and players to join. Along with that, not only do you get a decent organized game going, but also a potentially hack free game.

I dint know if switching of functionality is possible by limiting, i would think that the devs would probably have to create two different applications, one simple and another complex. If that is the case however, i doubt it will be done, given the amount of man power that is available, so honestly, as long as the implementation is usable and user friendly, I'm happy. If ACRE has to be a mod, then let it be. I like things to be natively implemented in vanilla game, so if they can't for reasons understandable, at least do a little effort to make it more assessable for modding, so that ACRE mod would not require ts3?

Correct term is serious game, that's what this is. Simulation is what vbs is, and is intended for training. ARMA is technically a game that is being serious about trying to simulate aspects of reality, it sits right in the middle between both. The while 2035 theme should be enough to prove that.

But let's not fight over what ARMA is, its what the devs make and what brings in the cash, by extension of modding, we can make it whatever we want, hardcore Sim or arcade game.

if not, why not?

+1

Well regardless, it still is a thing, and a real tactic as well, just because you didn't do it, doesn't mean it's a myth, some armies still train to do naked eye night vision, or mark one ball. Just remember prior to the technology of NVGs this was a very important tactic that was used especially heavily in ww2, Vietnam, gulf war, and as tech progresses, and becomes cheaper, these old tactics seem to become obsolete and don't get taught anymore. So now anyway, it's still something that can alleviate the gamma cheat, that's all I'm saying, why use a gamma cheat when you can have this as a fair vantage.

bdfriend, it's true, it never is that dark in real life, mainly because our eyes adjust at night, which is not properly simulated in ARMA series yet.

Look at this ticket http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=7660

This ticket will resolve the necessity to ramp up the gamma, and also give players without NVG some chance. This said, as suggested, NVG should be battery dependant, and the adjust time switching from NVG to naked eye should take much longer than it currently does.

There is a lot more than just gamma that people use as cheap hacks. I would hope that it is possible to fix all of the issues and force it server side, for example renderening grass, people disable it, disabling shadows, use low texture then objects stand out like a sore thumb etc.

And all people say it is cause their machines can't handle it, but most people can run it pretty well, and just do it as cheap hacks anyway to gain an advantage. I know this bacause I know a few people who told me these things. =/

It is sad really, but that is where console gaming has an advantage... I would like like if servers can set a minimum standard, so that regardless of what you set client side, there would be a minimum and a maximum set on the server side that cannot be set lower or higher than that setting. Then at least there can be more control on people exploiting cheap hacks via settings.

This is not so much of a big deal for me really. Sure I dont mind the tiny details being attendid to, but really now. nothing wrong with animations as they are now. You can use the deadzone to better this animation, or use free look.

After all, this effect will only be noticed whilst being still and looking around, So use free look instead, that is what it is there for. Freelook is there to control your head, or upper body when locking into iron sights, and general look is where your body faces.

I dont know, I prefer adjusting the deadzone, it adds that effect for me, and well, thats really what the deadzone is for, otherwise they would have to cut out the deadzone feature.

Personally i prefer the deadzone because especially when you use post processing effects and have motion blur, it really toys with focussing when swaying your weapon, however with deadzone, your general direction you are facing remains constant, and just the weapon moves around. This eliminates the motion blur for when focussing on to shot targets straight ahead, and at the same time, it hardly affects your FPS if you arent achieving great FPS above 40FPS consistently, so it makes those crucial shots way more smooth.

Personally I would say just learn to use the deadzone, thats what it is there for.

On that note, the deadzone on ARMA 3 is quite a bit weird compared to ARMA2. Will put in a ticket for devs to take a look at that.

perhaps with all the upvotes we might get enough attention to have it resolved, or worked around in the forseeable future.

I too expected this to be resolved with the new lighting engine, but i guess not.

great idea, i think it can go further than just for fast switching, it could allow to temporarily switch out primary weapons without having to drop your current weapon and magazines, and then switch back again after use.

a simple example would be sneaking up on a sniper, take him out, and only be able to pickup the enemies rifle with current magazine, thus temporary use. Once you switch to either primary rifle or sidearm, you will drop the weapon on the ground.

Think other situations where a specific weapon could be very useful at a particular moment, and without the need of using the inventory, you can just quickly pickup an enemies primary, be it a rifle for sniping, support gunner, RPG, etc.

This way you do not need to go into an inventory to manage your gear in critical moments where the inventory could just be what gets you killed.

Id as say a good way to indicate a tap would be a brief icon appearing in screen, not too big to get I'm the way, also placed out of the way from cross hair. This will be a great way, though the more anal fans will complain about the UI and how it breaks the realism etc. but i believe a quick fade in and out of the icon could prove useful. Also a text based number next to icon if more than one tap for example (icon)x3 can indicate the number of taps, so if you have predefined taps, like one tap means move back, two taps mean stay, three taps mean move forward etc, it could be useful to know the amount of taps.

Love this, voted up. BIS should just integrate the whole ace experience into ARMA 3.

voted up, I agree with the inventory system needing work, but how it is, is good. I'd say when taking your first magazine, you should NOT reload automatically, rather take what you want, and then when exiting the inventory, you can hit the relaod action.

Also if you have to pickup all your mags individually, then you have to swap them out individually, thus if you do take another weapon of same ammunition you can keep what you have.

I think you got me wrong boson, I'm just saying don't favour something only select few with the cash can afford or have, what i meant is, choose an option that won't be nvidia specific, or ati specific. I'm not saying don't do 3D because some don't have 3D TVs or the expensive accessories, and some have nvidia cards so the ati folks miss out, others have ati cards so nvidia folks miss out. All I'm saying is, choose something that everyone can use regardless, or just don't do it i guess.

well I dont have anything that supports 3D, so to me, this feature doesnt mean much, and I bet I am one of millions, so I'd say the more features the merrier, but because 3D isn't a standard norm worldwide for every single user, I would say this shouldnt be way up there as one of the most important features, in fact I bet this could be an afterthought, after the game has released. There are more important things and features that need attention and implimentation right now.

If you dont want to buy a game because it lacks 3D then find an alternative that does. I hear Black Ops supports 3D. Don't try and boycot the devs.

As a side note to this, I agree with MulleDK, I'm a Nvidia user too, but I dont see any point to get additional HW to see 3D, and this too will be a setback for ATI users, if it does get implimented, please do so that will benefit all users equally regardless of their choice to what brand GPU, or TV/Monitor they have, and also minus any additonal accessories.

same here, but more random than consistent. Not sure if it is related to domination specifically as I usually get it when playing domination. Game randomly starts to stutter ever 3-5min for a while then I jusmp to another server or game type and everything is OK.

As for solo play on showcases, I can run the game pretty neatly at above 50 fps, and then whilst running in one direction (no sudden movements or anything particular happening on screen or around me) achieving my average of 53 frames, my frames will suddenly just randomly drop to 30's or even lower frames.

I will say there has been major changes in performance since the release of A3A, but still, it can be better =)

Also, the heli showcase.... seriously need to do something about that.

i5 3570K @ 4.4Ghz
Win7 Pro X64
GTX 660 (non-Ti)
8Gb Ram

I have recently been playing with the JSRS2.0 and honestly, it is beautiful, the sounds engine seems to be good, but the vanilla sounds samples seem rather horriblecompared to JSRS, so i sincerely do hope that the current sound in vanilla ARMA are just place holders. Seriously though, BI would invest well to hire jarhead.

Or, get lord jarhead on board... I'm not saying the sound is crap, can't say anything really since i haven't heard the final sounds. However given he has made an amazing replacement for ARMA 2 sounds, i think hes talent is worth having on board.

great video. Made quite a few things rather clear about supressed weapons =)

Still though, to be honest, I could tell a bit of a difference between the distance, compared to standing right next to the camera that is, and then off in the distance. though the difference was not as much as I anticipated, but the difference was there. I bet 300+m the all those weapons except the AR would be fairly quiet, could easily have gone unnoticed if people were having a face to face conversation and not listening in anticipation.

That said, the frequency generated that confuses the target where the shot came from, would obviously also impact the distance as well, however not to the extent that a shot 300m away should sound the same as if right next to you. You would be able to determine if a shot was within 10m away or somewhere between 100m and 300m away etc. I cant say until someone actually posts a video testing that =)

Now i know ArmA is far from finished, and I am sure the sound is also not completed as yet and does not reflect the final version, however it is worth the concern as sound probably plays a bigger role than the graphics.

Fireball, i agree with that statement, however i don't know about distance really. I can't imagine a suppressed weapon from 500m sounding like it's right next to you. But agree the point of a suppressed weapon is to minimize signature, and confuse the target from where the shot came from.

Am I right about this?

well i can agree with this, i too find the sound to be horrific, especially to judge where someone is shooting from, unlike arma 2, I just really struggle to tell where i am being shot from.

Then again being an alpha, I am sure this is not going to be final, I am positively sure the sound will get fixed before final release.

And Hell Yeah to JSRS sound mod, definately worth having him on the BIS team for sound.

Well based in the theory, you would still be able to see a little of the enemy poking out. But even still, muzzle flash will still give away position as it does now.