Page MenuHomeFeedback Tracker

Angelsgate
User

Projects

User does not belong to any projects.

User Details

User Since
Jun 15 2013, 10:58 PM (314 w, 3 d)

Recent Activity

May 10 2016

Angelsgate added a comment to T65153: Buildings do not feel right.

Not much interaction with them either atm aside from just the doors. Maybe add windows to that option to make buildings more feasable in ambushes in general.

May 10 2016, 1:49 AM · Arma 3
Angelsgate added a comment to T63743: Add realistic body armour..

@skrim Can you stop ripping (other downvoters/)my statements out of context and/or result to personal insults. I'll state AGAIN that your proposed changes in its current form (taken from ACE, VBS or real life) are hilariously unbalanced without either; the introduction of an ingame counter or downscaling of the statistics.

Quote by fireball; "Also, there is no suggestion along the ticket on how this should be implemented, e.g. by what kind of config values and if there are more models/uniforms needed and how many types of body armours etc."

As stated by fireball/others/myself, the current proposal is paperthin with no real addition to the game other then extra hitpoints in an asthetical package. Instead of putting the ball in BIS's corner (since you know they would have to hire another physicist, which you know costs alot of $) try to take the constructive critisism from the downvoters and offer an intelligent proposal. Instead of resulting to personal insults.

@Crierd

Actually I have, I've found a rather interesting study by the U.S. federal government on the quality of testing of body armour by USARMY/USSOCCOM. Back to the main subject. My problem is not with the adding of body armour itself, its with lazily porting the statistics from either ACE/VBS/RL. Furthermore ACE/VBS/RL are completely different from vanilla ARMA. Why not wait for ACE3, purchase VBS, enlist irl, or propose a complete port of their features into ARMA? (FYI I have played the ACE's and I will enjoy ACE3, just in a different way then vanilla).

Ill admit I was poking a little fun with taking the simulation aspect to the ninth degree, apparently the humor was lost and it backfired into a personal vendetta against my opinions.

Now instead of going in circles lets go forward instead. Your comment about the chicken plates(/shattering door concept) was something I hadnt considered yet and honestly they are good points. I am however a bit skeptikal about the current hitbox sytem that BIS employs (can anyone shed some light on the current system used?). Within the limits of the current technology making a much more complex hitbox system would mean a larger amount of calculations for the engine. If BIS currently uses a torso/arms/head model it would be virtually impossible to add chicken plates into a body armour model. It would mean that the current model needs to evolve from a 16 box system (its probably more, just simplifying) to a system that is magnitudes more complex (e.g. extra torso boxes for the plates/cloth armour, extra boxes for the helmet simulation). This process would have to be repeated for every single armour wearing entity on the map.

The paragraph above summs up one of the reasons I believe that some form of engine overhaul might be neccesary. Onto the other point. Common sense seems to be lost on the masses nowadays, so pointing out that this needs a counter is only logical.

These counters can be various things;
--Either a more advanced medical system then the current one. For example major arteryial hits on the neck/upper legs could simulate an uncurable wound x% of the time. Broken bones,internal bleeding, concussions,etc. Some of which are uncurable in the field most of the time. Like I've stated before I personally am not a fan of them because it would slow down the vanilla gameplay too much in my opinion.

--Or some form of AP rounds which...kind of defeats the purpose of armour all together and just results in pointless extra weight carried. Because of the added penetration these type of rounds do less traumatic damage to an unarmoured target unless it hits a bone, major artery or organ). If this balancing path is chosen then I predict a future where everyone will use this type of ammo.

--Or a downscaled version of what is posted above. As an example we will look at the pistols, namely the helmets being invulnrable vs pistols is a bit silly from a realistic viewpoint. If you can still think straight after a close range .50 Deagle impact then kudos to you! (i know not standard issue, just trying paint a picture).

There are a few others I have in mind but they are not as major as these balances. Aside from that you have three new possibilities to consider, use them as constructive critisism or result to personal insults again.

Angel

May 10 2016, 12:54 AM · Arma 3
Angelsgate added a comment to T63743: Add realistic body armour..

Ehr, I never implied that any of you were lying and unlike others in this feedback I have tried to refrain from personal insults.

The statistics you posted are numbers based upon armourer infomercials and pictures of (often miraculous) saves. I guarantee you that for every "lucky" soldier in those pictures there will have been an unlucky one. As it currently stands, the proposals made by most upvoters is just added hitpoints in an asthetical package.

As said by you; "Further, if you just jump on to random DM servers, there won't be any realism regardless of realistic body armour or not."
None of ARMA 3 caters to a realistic setting; Fictional Island, Fictional factions, fictional weapons/equipment, Fictional healing process (magic FAK's ftw) and a fictional timeline.

I can't offer a suitable solution that wouldn't make this added feature horribly gamebreaking. The beautifull thing about ARMA is that its not a hardcore military sim. Its the best of both worlds without falling into the arcade crevasse like many others. If you are searching this form of realism then I heartily reccommend that you purchase the VBS package instead.

May 10 2016, 12:54 AM · Arma 3
Angelsgate added a comment to T63743: Add realistic body armour..

@ nsKb true but it would mean more clock calculations and thus more performance needed for the masses. Don't get me wrong it would eventually be a great feature, just not at this time when there are other issues that are gamebreaking.

@ scrim let me reiterate what I mean by turning arma into an arcade shooter. The statistics you posted for the armour system are a joke. Your basically saying that nothing should be one hit kill unless its a .50 cal/12.7mm.

right now in every server you play in, everybody and their mother is trying to get their hands on the SR rifles. By implementing this, that will only get worse and frankly that scares me. I love the ARMA series for its sheer brutality, one mistake and your dead, simple as that.

I don't want to lie unconsious on a field for minutes on end, I don't want to put a ridiculus amount of rounds into a single entity to make sure they stay down. I personally am not interested in being able to soak up a ton of rounds either.

This cry for "realism" as some of you have stated is merely a cry for extra hitpoints in a clever disguise. If you DO WANT actual realism then: The round trajectory, speed it is traveling, type of armor, type of round fired, heat/humidity, weather, victim stance, point of impact, material of the round, gravitational pull etc come into play. The sheer amount of physics needed to make this even remotely "real" is staggering. As stated in this article: http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/03/01/what-happens-in-arma-3-when-you-fire-a-gun/
, many of my above mentioned points are not yet implemented (so yes you are basically asking for an engine overhaul/update).

This is not a feature I personally see contributing to the FunFactor that ARMA currently possesses.

@Crierd See the above mostly. With ARMA3 we are going away from the 20th century, no doubt about that in my mind. However why would you only consider the armour portion of the development? Maybe in 2036 (which is when ARMA3 takes place if you bothered to check(this pretty much blows away any points of realism even my own)) there will be rounds that penetrate even current modern armours.

I would hope that for the story's sake, a middle eastern superpower would have invested some time into advanced ammunition, instead of carrying on the current tradition of ammo made in a cave.

just my $0.02 guys, don't take it personal.

May 10 2016, 12:54 AM · Arma 3
Angelsgate added a comment to T63743: Add realistic body armour..

Downvoted: Its would need to rely on too many other systems that are not implemented; realistic wounding, realistic hit detection, modular body armor, etc.
Frankly devs would expend too much time on something that would turn Arma into an arcade shooter. In my opinion their time is much better spent on the stability issues with the CPU and GPU.

May 10 2016, 12:53 AM · Arma 3

May 9 2016

Angelsgate added a comment to T61699: Scopes not working with NVG.

Downvoted. As stated above me the current NVG's being used in ARMA 3 are the dual version. The angle for looking through a scope would be hilariously unnatural.

May 9 2016, 11:18 PM · Arma 3
Angelsgate added a comment to T60885: Movement sounds seem to lag behind player after a bit..

G35 as well. Ive found that this also applies to reloading sounds.

May 9 2016, 10:33 PM · Arma 3