Basically, if it' a big deal to us, it should be treated as a big deal by people who want to pretend to BE us.

Sorry, but if you're going to simulate being in the military then you gotta be anal like the military. Otherwise it's not a simulation, it's a game.

In the military we take a LOT of pride in what we do and how we do it. Military service is about following orders, and when the order is to use prescribed radio procedures, if you can't manage to do it then you flat out aren't worthy to wear the uniform. In combat you have to be able to rely upon the men and women around you to perform as they were trained. It is a big deal because lax discipline and inability to follow orders, a laxidasical attitude, those are things that get people killed.

Following orders and procedure is a HUGE deal. If that isn't reflected in the attention to detail given to the game, then you might as well go play battlefield.

And I have to say that the issue of whether it SHOULD be improper or not, whether it actually causes any harm in real life or not, is totally irrelevant. It's a matter of accurately portraying reality, and in reality, it's improper. Doesn't matter that it can be argued that it's a dumb rule.

I think it's a faulty assumption that its "not considered blasphemy" by the uk and Australian militarys. Lets solicit the opinion of some actual combat vets from those countries rather than making assumptions based on no military experience.

At any rate, a British or Australian soldier or even small detachment would never use such phrases when communicating on an American commo net. You don't violate the rules of the house you're visiting.

Look, the bottom line is that in the US military, and likely most other english speaking militaries, saying Roger WILCO *is* improper. At best it will be ignored, at worst disciplinary action is taken against the offender. Most commonly the person just sounds stupid when they say it. Having characters in game say Roger WILCO is like having a private piloting a jet, or mistakenly using ten code instead of normal radio communications, or saying baker instead of bravo, or having an m107 weigh 5 lbs, or making a sniper rifle with a suppressor whisper quiet, or inventing infantry hand signals that have no basis in reality, or calling female officers "Sir", or any of the other silly mistakes that can be made. It's hollywodization, and does not reflect how the military, and more importantly war, really is. It matters only in so much as we desire accuracy and authenticity, but in those regards it DOES matter. It's immersion breaking for those of us who know better, and causes misperceptions for those who don't. It ought to be fixed. It won't kill anyone if it isn't, but it will look bad in terms of attention to detail.

as I said, nails on chalkboards. :)

in the game it's also about 20 years in the future. US uniforms change every 10-15 years or so.

Depends on the country, and depends on the job. Supply clerks don't typically spend much time on the radio.

so... US Army procedure vs NATO procedure?

In fact, a quick google produced it: http://library.enlisted.info/field-manuals/series-1/FM24_19/CH5.PDF check page 8.

lol ok, seriously, according to US Army regulations and standard procedures, as taught in 31C Radio Operator/Maintiner advanced school in 2000, Roger WILCO is NOT, I say again, NOT proper procedure. Not correct. It is used in movies, but it is, officially, any way you look at it, wrong. Again, Roger is defined as "I understand your transmission". WILCO is defined as "I understand your transmission and will comply." I can probably find the field manual that defines them, if it's really necessary. Or you nutty fellows can just take my word for it. :P

This is a massive pain in the ass. I've been having to copy and paste my mission folder and go in with Notepad++ to manually edit description and mission.sqm files in order to make variants of the mission. Gets tedious when updating the core mission.

Except that the compass doesn't show up in the map screen, and you still have no good way to measure distance unless you hold a ruler up to your monitor. So better to put a ruler in the map screen, or fake it with a point to point tool of some sort. Grid squares do no good if you can't figure out how long a line from point a to point b is.

I'd personally like to see it allow full auto with the suppressor installed. A suppression weapon isn't very useful on semi auto.

lulz

Straight dope: A silencer is a suppressor is a silencer. A flash suppressor is something entirely different. As for a suppressor/silencer, the effectiveness depends on the original report volume, the noise reduction capability of the suppressor, and whether the bullet is supersonic or subsonic when it leaves the weapon. A relatively quiet round, such as your typical 9mm nato round, when fired from a suppressed weapon at a distance of about 100m or so will still have a sonic boom associated with it, which will sound like a loud crack or snap. However, the muzzle report would likely be unrecognizable, and may go unnoticed. This can result in the 'pop' of the shot coming not from the location it was fired from, but the direction that the bullet traveled in, resulting in observers being unable to locate the actual source of the shot. This effect can similarly be observed with higher power weapons such as assault or sniper rifles, though the report is much easier to detect for those cartridges. Using subsonic ammunition prevents the sonic boom, and can make the shot even less detectable, but subsonic ammo is typically not available for higher powered cartridges (no subsonic .308 win, for example). For a round like a .22LR, firing subsonic ammunition, it is definitely possible for a shot to be completely undetected beyond 50m, and unrecognized for what it is within 50m. However, for larger rounds, detection is inevitable. Further, even with, say, an mp5sd firing subsonic ammunition, which would be very difficult for the average person to identify, a soldier in a war zone will be much more paranoid about noises, and more prone to assume that an unidentified sound has nefarious origins.

that would be an interesting choice, but would make more sense than what is ballistically similar to the 7.62x39 russian round (according to wikipedia anyway). Fat cases aren't very nice for military use though, as they waste space in the magazine, imo. At any rate, there is a discrepency between the field manual and the game itself, so hopefully that gets squared away.

Bipods are easily removable on most small arms, though lmgs like the M249 have permanently attached bipods. Grenade launchers have traditionally required tools to remove, but I believe newer models are removable without any special effort.

both setOvercast and setRain do nothing for me, either in the init.sqf or later in game executed by trigger or debugger command.

Im experiencing this also. When the game is under heavy load, it seems to miss certain events, such as clicking the mouse to fire. I've noticed that this happens especially when audio is playing, be it gunfire sounds, or, even moreso, ai speech. It seems to be somehow related to the number of objects that the engine is keeping track of. Perhaps there is an 'events to be handled' buffer which gets overfilled?

It's not just limited to firing though. I've had triggers fail to be evaluated despite their conditions being satisfied. This needs to get fixed big time. Makes the game unpredictable when triggers aren't triggering reliably.

I think this is a bug, since the command elements of a squad will direct subordinate units to engage, and the subordinate units will respond that they are engaging, but they don't don anything.

Just as a temporary bit of info, below are the capacites, in units of 6.5mm stanag and 9mm 16Rnd Magazines, of some clothing and pack items:

Clothes:
Combat Fatigues - 2 6.5mm STANAG and 1 9mm 16Rnd Mag
Combat Fatigues (Tee) - 2 and 1
Recon Fatigues - 2 and 1
Heli Pilot Coveralls - 7

Chest harnesses and LBVs:
Rangemaster Belt - 1
Slash Bandolier - 8
Fighter Chest Rig - 10
Chest Rig - 11
Tactical Vest - 12 and 1
Carrier Lite - 14
Carrier Rig - 20
Carrier GL Rig - 21
LBV Harness - 25 and 1
LBV Grenadier Harness - 28

Bags:
Bag - 34
Assault Pack - 34
Field Pack - 35 and 1
Kit Bag - 42 and 1
Bergen - 54
Carryall Backpack - 60

Hopefully this data helps a little until a comparison feature gets implemented.

I'd vote for melee in the form of bayonets, a butt strike, and overhead smash with the butt of the rifle, as we were taught in basic training. Not sure what training infantry got, but as of 2000, non-infantry hand to hand training was a joke in the US Army. To my knowledge, the only people who did any in depth study or real practical training were special forces. Actual hand to hand combat is extremely rare, even for infantry, and properly employing it when wearing a plate carrier isn't very likely.

Ability to modify the color of those elements would be nice too, but second the shadow or outline idea.

Rain at night, too bright
I can't see where I'm going
Chemlight is my friend

@oldirty okay dude, I'm calling you out. You are lying, and you are trolling this thread. No military rifle is capable of accurate automatic fire at 1000 m. You are not a soldier, you are not an expert, and you attempted to tell a PHYSICIST that he was wrong in regards to PHYSICS. You are continuously making subtle personal attacks against others in this thread for the sole purpose of eliciting a reaction from them. Moderators, please ban oldirty. This has gone on long enough.

Lulz. I think we're being trolled, guys. XD

And seriously, don't try to argue physics with a physicist.

It should not function like that because that's not how recoil works in real life. Modeling recoil as the weapon rotating by x number of degrees is just wrong.

I am a physicist. I say it is neither mathematically correct, whatever that means, nor an accurate model of the effects of recoil upon a rifle. My knowledge of physics trumps the fact that you live in Switzerland (which is a damned cool place). The Fix-Iters are correct.

Additional note: there is a maximum amount that the muzzle will climb under continuous fire, as the weapon operator will actively resist the climbing by either reducing the force they exert to hold the weapon up, or, in extreme cases by pulling it back down. So provision ought to be made to limit climb over all, and once it gets a certain ways away from the aim point, convert it to general random movement on firing, rather than movement in a specific direction.

Proposed method: on fire, record gun aim point. Generate random return point within a circle about the aim point based on weapon mass and firing position. Generate a recoil point for the muzzle to move to based on weapon mass, cartridge type, and firing position. Animate movement of the muzzle from aim point, to recoil point, and back to return point. For burst or full auto fire, use the same return point, but allow the recoil point to change with each successive round fired, simulating the dramatic muzzle climb that can occur under full auto fire. Once the burst is complete, and the animation has finished, the return point is the new aim point, and a new return point will be generated for the next fire sequence. Moving the mouse while firing moves both the aim point and the return point, but keeps their positions relative to each other the same.

A system written in this fashion will accurately simulate a shooter instinctively being able to bring the weapon back to approximately where he or she wants to aim, but then having to make a deliberate fine adjustment to bring the sights precisely back on target. It will also accurately simulate the differences between burst and continuous fire. This is what it feels like to fire real military weapons. Take this suggestion and give it some thought. I'm confident that most people will agree with it. If you don't, then just take my word for it: I'm a US Army veteran with expert qualifications on pistol, LMG, and assault rifles. and a physicist.

A rifle climbing to the sky is silly and absurdly unrealistic.

Note, the above assumes that the return to the return point will take longer than it takes for the weapon to cycle and fire another round. If the interval between rounds fired is equal to or greater than the fire-recoil-return animation interval, then continuous fire will not compound into muzzle climb.

Beginning to sound like it might be another jip problem. Really hope this gets resolved, as tasks and briefings for jip players are long overdue. It would be ridiculous to continue to have to resort to community made scripts and solutions for so basic a functionality.

This sounds like the same problem I'm having: Tasks, diary entry, etc, all parts of the mission briefing, are not transmitted to remote machines when I host a MP game.

This got me killed when an ai squad leader ordered me out of an ifrit in the middle of an opfor infantry squad.

@EDcase I don't know if that is true for arma, but it is not true in general. The DCS series can make use of every button on a controller without the need for anything other than the drivers that come with it. The topic has been discussed extensively in their forums, and the limitations most games have is due purely to an arbitrary choice by the authors. This is an easy problem to correct.

From http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/gg487464.aspx

"DirectInput does not limit the number of usages that can map to each type of axis. Applications designed for DirectInput typically request up to 128 buttons, four points of view (POVs), two sliders, and one each of X, Y, Z, Rx, Ry, and Rz."

My understanding is that the program simply has to internally provide names for as many buttons as it intends to support, so it's really a minor issue to increase that number. I may be wrong about those details, but I am confident that BI could very easily add support for all the buttons on these controllers, should they decide to.

And they should decide to.

Applies to the Saitek X65F as well. Problem is probably due to maximum number of buttons per controller set to some arbitrary number like 16 or 32 or something.

I've encountered this bug too. The item doesn't just disappear though, it will go into some sort of phantom cargo space, resulting in your total weight carried going up, even though the item is not in any accessible container on your person, nor available for use (tested with an explosive charge) through menu commands. This is related to general inventory issue reports 0000104 and 0004650 (and a few other similar reports). This needs attention.

Big up vote, for every reason possible. I'd like to be able to make a mission where a NATO female infantry company shoots the crap out of the Iranians. I'd like for my HF, who is a real life combat vet with MORE combat experiences under her belt than I have, be able to play without feeling neglected. I'd like to make a mission where a female agent posing as a civilian assassinates a general and then has to gear up to fight her way out. I'd like to have the freaking option, without having to install mods, and without people using my missions having to install mods. Put them in and leave it up to the players to use them how they see fit.

Lights ought to take very little damage to extinguish them. Even a grenade going off at the base of a lightpost would likely shatter the bulb (not to mention messing up the wiring). One bullet should be all that's required.

This issue doesn't really apply all the time, since packs on the ground or in containers can have items in them, but for identical empty packs, agreed that they should stack. After all, who DOESN'T want to have a crate with 500 backpacks in it, right? >.>

This is a problem with the views being reset to a predefined default when switching views, rather than the last known state for that view. I bet we can find several related tickets floating around. 0006371 for example.

Modern weapons use magazines, not clips.

Ka60 has missiles capable of locking onto ground armor units, but not air units, so there is actually a good reason for letting the thing move.

I've also noticed that you can make the ka-60 explode by ramming it once with a quad bike.

When full turbo running there is no change in animation, just in speed, from leaning, but when turbo running and low on stamina (tired sprinting) the character both leans and is slowed somewhat. When simply moving forward and leaning, the speed is that of combat mode, and the weapon is raised into the combat stance. I like how this functions for everything except the full turbo mode. If there is no change in animation, then the speed shouldn't be affected, but for the other sub modes, I like it.