Did we not get a distance attached to each target in the Target menu. Then it should be possible to get this as well in the Action menu, and have them sorted as described. This should hopefully be easy.

But I would like to take it a step further. Have a command in the Action menu, that just says Rearm. AI will then locate the closest source for rearming with the standard loadout for its class (FAK, grenades, magazines, etc.). If this could consider any live Ammo Bearers as well, it would be even better.

Why are you reporting this? BIS are probably aware of this, you know :)

Sound works fine for me

As stated in my second line, I would have each vehicle have a number of cargo spaces, with each cargo space only available to certain seats and having varying cargo space.

So if we take a Humvee, it should have a trunk cargo space (with 70% of the Humvee carry capacity) and a crew compartment cargo space (with the remaining 30%). The crew cargo space should be accessible for all crew members at all times (possible also for exited soldiers standing beside the vehicle), while the trunk should only be available for soldiers standing behind the vehicle.

I know that this solution is not for everyone, but that would be my preference.

No, it does not seem likely to change much, and in that case, your idea might just help a bit

We can definitely agree that the current implementation is inconsistent and makes both of us unhappy :)

Failing to specify location of cargo space and which seats have access to what cargo for each vehicle, I would however prefer the more limited version.

My reasoning is that I feel it is too fast to switch equipment as it is, and this could help somewhat with 'vehicular ammoboxes'

@ArmaPlayer: I don´t want the game to be 'super-realistic', but it should make sense. A driver reaching back, grapping a Titan Launcher, while still driving a tank does not make sense to me.

It would depend on the vehicle. In an Ifrit it might possible, however most of the armoured vehicles, the driver does not have access to the passenger seats (where the storage space usually is.

You might want to actually describe the ticket like St. Jimmy suggested then. Each ticket should be self-contained and not rely on relationships with other tickets

Have a look at this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cix07R1vlhI) and you can see how, and why, projectiles shoot through a number of objects

+1

VON is also used for Direct and Vehicle, so perhaps you be a more precise in you description, so everyone will know it should only affect Side, Team, etc.

Teamswitch also work, for me, upon dying on Dev.

And what exactly was the solution for Arma 2 for those who do not remember :)?

On Dev branch, I still see rain when activating NVGs

Edit the ticket to exclude the 'roll' step over, and you have my vote

And how would you map everything to a controller?

I know there is an AA variant that can be used, but I was arguing that the plane was built for CAS, but can be equipped to provide basic AA capability. This would make sense for a small country that cannot afford multiple plane types.

However while exchanging bombs for AA missiles is a simple process that can be done by ground crew in a few hours, I am not sure that the gun is made to be "plug-and-play" the same way.

But isn´t the Buzzard´s role primarily CAS? So there might not be a variant gun available for AA duties.

The AP is armor piercing in this case, it says so in the description of the round ingame. However it is probably a mis-labelling, as it very effective versus infantry. So you are both sort of right :)

And my argument that hard-coded repair functionality would provide for LESS interesting things are not relevant? Would it not provide the best of both worlds?

Good idea to make a simple module for this, but should not by default be active. It can screw up plenty of missions if a hard-coded repair point is available.

Sarcastic or not, this would be a good idea as well. Make a global module to toggle repair and/or refuel functionality at gas stations.

There aren´t any shotguns, so thats why you can´t find them?

I tested with the DEV build against crewed T-100

Just tested the T-100 against DAGR: 2 from the back, or 3 from the front, seems to consistently disable or destroy it

With Skalpel ATGM it took only one to either disable or destroy the tank.

Nope, sorry :) I am bit colour-blind, and that is probably stopping me from seeing it

Would you mind having a look at http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=8387? My bug was closed, as only I could apparently see it.

I can´t see anything like that in your screenshot?

As the airstrip seems to be constructed on it, the speed bonus makes sense to me.

Gameplay-wise it would be interesting with an exposed gunner.

Fixed on today Dev build

Unable to pickup static weapon bags in current Stable version. Will switch to Beta and attempt with that one.

Problem fixed in current Dev version. Closing

Had to read this several times to understand, you might to change break to brake, as I read it as every vehicle destroys itself when having a speed of less than 10 km/h.

Have you ever watched the movie Speed? :D

break = cease to function
brake = slow down

To solve your specific problem, couldn´t you have them split in 3 groups at the beginning, load each group in a Marshall and then use the Join WP to have them move together?

But a Follow WP might be a nice idea anyhow.

No, it is not so hard to understand. But the title and the description does not really match. Just change 2 things:

Change LOITER in the title to DISMISSED

Replace "With a max range no so big they start to actually loiter around like they do in DISMISS." with "Enable a max range to be set for the waypoint, so they do not loiter too far away"

As ceeeb says, shouldn´t this be a ticket about setting a max range on the Dismissed waypoint?

And this one: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=13511

YES! I have just 10 scenarios currently, and they take a while to load each time, even when they haven´t been updated

Thanks, I get it then. This seems like a strange request for editor functionality. It is the equivalent of changing the top speed of the Marshall, or the round capacity of a magazine, in the Editor. If a maximum range of UAVs needs to be implemented either BIS needs to do it, or a mod needs to be created IMO.

Could you try and rephrase this suggestion? I don´t really understand what you want.

This is not how to use a tracker. Please close and open separate tickets for each (that does not already exist, as mentioned by AD2011)

Yep, have reversed my vote

I think its fine that the drop gets stuck, but the chute should disappear when this happens. If you change the description to match this, you might get some upvotes :)

Anything to make thermal vision less insta-spotting!

Strange, I did not notice a patch downloading, but the problem seems to be gone

It seems to be just the SAFE behavior that is causing the issue. The speed does not matter. And as you wrote, it only causes issues for groups, nor individual soldiers.

Remember to vote for your own ticket! :)

Sorry, was trying to make fun of GeneralScottm but forgot the smiley :)

.408 rounds are pretty powerful, so seems legit.

I am pretty sure you could recreate this with any vehicle and weapon. It happens when the geometry of two models collide, then the physics mess up.

You are totally right. My aunt told me she heard from a bus driver that all sniper rifles shoot with depleted-tungsten triple-duty rounds with dark matter cores, that weighs around 150 kg and travels at a speed of around 4600 m/s which equals 1.6 Gj. That equals around 380 kg TNT. One shot, one giant explosion!

BTW, a Dragunov uses 7.62mm cartridges :)

@MulleDK19: That sort of makes sense :)

Don´t know which windmills you have been listening to, but if you can hear them from miles away something is probably wrong :) But they do need to make sounds. Upvoted

Have a look at these pictures (http://imgur.com/a/p1cCe). More civilian vehicles are on the way. But a bus and larger trucks seem necessary.

While I am not directly opposed to this, you can always Select Medic and press 6 to bring up his action menu. There you will get the option to heal wounded soldiers in his vicinity. Not exactly what you ask for, but should help you in the situation you described.

Amazing that this ticket has been created months ago :) upvoted

Added screenshot of issue in current version from showcase Armed Assault

I am not sure if the OP meant that only targets that can be locked on, should be stabilized. It would nice to have stabilization even when looking across the terrain.

I agree that being able to see further with high beam would be good, but when would you use low beam? Would that only be for not blinding your team mates. There is rarely any opposing traffic to blind :)

To me it seems that permanently changing the lights of vehicles from low to high would be the simplest solution to this.

I am not sure why this should be implemented? What will it provide the Arma experience? Turn signal lights seems more important that this to me.

I agree that some kind of fragmentation modelling would be really nice, but your suggestion only make sense for cases where LOS between soldier and grenade are completely unobscured. As soon as this is not the case, ie. partial cover from walls, other soldiers, etc. it gets more complicated.

The total number of fragments are also fixed, so the chance of getting hit needs to increase exponentially as you get closer to the grenade. And then the speed of the fragments needs to be considered at different ranges as 2000 m/s can kill you while 1000 m/s will "just" hurt a lot.

So a simple model can probably be created but your suggestions might just be a bit too simple :)

Try turning cloud cover to max, and I think you will see a slight change in ground illumination when using flares. So the problem is not that they have no illuminating effect, but that it is too weak.

Part of the problem is also that the flares either deploy to early, or burn out too fast, so that they never get close enough to the ground to provide useable illumination.

Just making sure: There would not be a way to dig them out again hopefully? It is just a way to make them disappear?

@ceeeb: That works for single groups of enemies, but if you have a large area with multiple groups of enemies, then you would need to kill all of them once you have been spotted by just a single one. But thanks for suggestion!

Was googling for a solution to this problem. Glad to see its a bug, and not me being too stupid :)

Kol9yn, could you explain what you mean by "zombie"? Are all downvoters braindead, hungry for flesh, foul-smelling or ???

I´m not expert on AA systems, but I am pretty sure targeting systems in general can only engage a single target at a time. Downvoted

Simplifying creating missions = upvote

As I stated, my message was not a solution to what he requested, but if he was unaware of that option, it might help a bit now that he knows his original request won´t be implemented

I never said it was a bad idea. I just tried to potentially help the OP with a feature he might not be aware of. Exactly why you perceive my posts to negative towards the issue I cannot understand?

You do know that when standing/kneeling you can switch weapon from right to left by ctrl+a, right? Not exactly what you are asking, but it gives more options when leaning

Downvoting this until the idea is more fleshed out. Have no idea why or how you want this implemented.

I have to downvote this due to the implausibility of the request, and attitude/language of the reporter

Most explosives are way to stable to be detonated by a hit from a bullet, but I like the idea of equipment getting damaged. Particularly if the soldier is hit with rockets, grenades, etc.

More documentation for the editor = upvote

Military police DOES deploy to other countries, where they police their own soldiers (drunk driver, deserters, substance abuse, etc.) However this is not terribly relevant for the game.

But they also handle prisoners of war, traffic control for military convoys (both combat troops and supply trucks), escort VIPs and perform as couriers for sensitive information. These actions all seem interesting for scenario design, and thus I see it as a relevant request to include character models + MP specific skin for a vehicle.

Furthermore the ability to restrain an individual could be useful for ordinary soldiers/special forces as well. Currently being a prisoner has to be roleplayed/scripted, as you can run freely, pickup weapons, shout to others. Having equipment to stop a character for picking up/using items, disabling running or gagging a prisoner to stop them from alerting the enemy would be great.

Well, we have different opinions on how to use the downvote system then :) As I see it, a downvote for a ticket is a relative increase in value of my upvotes on tickets important to me.

I have also downvoted a ticket for dual-wielding pistols and SMGs, which, while quite unrealistic, could probably be useful some of the crazier mods. As I understand your reasoning, such a ticket should also not be downvoted.

I am certain that barrel-changing can have many good implications for the way you (and perhaps 99% of players) play the game, but from my POV it is not important.

Part of my downvote is because I see this request as two different things. The first is changing between identical barrels to stop overheating, while the other is the option of changing the characteristics of each weapon. Splitting the request would make more sense to me, but not you perhaps :)

The reason not to add overheating barrels is a matter of priority for me. Even though it is perfectly realistic to include, I would rather see Bohemia focus on other things.
If this was to be implemented correctly, it should be possible to for an assistant gunner to change the barrel, as he would probably be carrying the spare. And then the AI should be able to do this as well. I think this would take more development time that I would like spent on other things. However if this suggestion was separated from the other, I would certainly not downvote it, and perhaps upvote it depending on how you suggest it is implemented.

As for the changing barrels for customization, for me using development time for a feature that has poor value, from my perspective, is wasteful. The difference between having two different rifles, or one rifle and two barrels, in ammo box is negligible. And the ability to carry all the different barrels, receivers, etc. around with you to change weapon type in the field would only enhance the one-man-army tendency on public servers

Downvoted. Seems like two different suggestions, one for overheating barrel, and another for different barrels.

The overheating part would for me be too much simulation, not enough gameplay value, while the gameplay difference between having multiple barrels, or multiple versions of each gun, is nearly non-existent.

@Laxemann,

Thanks, it seem to work as I expected. Definitely need this for Arma 3

Upvoted. It seems we only have the Civilian module, or can assign the Dismissed order. Neither of which is usable for a crowd of demonstrators, or a refugee group moving across the country-side.

BTW, could anyone briefly describe/screenshot the crowd formation from VBS2?

Look at the screenshot :)

I was using the default weapon for a BLUFOR rifleman with the reflector sight, but it seems to happen with all primary weapons, ie. not pistols

If it could be changed to compass directions at the same time, it would be great

It seems that a light fog has been added to nighttime, but otherwise it looks the same to me.

Changing the FOV might be an idea as well, however the narrow FOV is a problem in reality as well.

I think the poor depth perception with NVGs are due to a lack of strong shadows ,and that many NVGs are single-lens. The NVGs in Arma 3 are all dual lens and shadows seem to be drawn as if it was day.

The blur effect I applied could probably use less blur, and more noise. I tried to model the effect from picture pvs143.jpg

Sorry, I did not notice the picture did not upload due to .gif. Have a look at how you fire such a weapon while being prone (as Jejn explained it). And as the backblast is not modelled currently, they might not even worry about it.

A weapon like a Javelin is probably not feasible to fire in such a way