- User Since
- Mar 25 2013, 11:34 PM (505 w, 6 d)
May 10 2016
Quite frequently most of the rotors will stay intact as well and just be bent to hell.
That's to be expected on a site like that. However it is great to see the tactics they are using so hopefully BI can implement ways to stop it.
100% behind you on this one man. I put up an issue report like this too but mine got closed. I've been quite active in the steam community making this issue known but it seems that everyone is okay with dealing with this because "its just an alpha."
The thing people aren't getting is that even though its an alpha, major problems that prevent game play entirely (such as a crash), are addressed immediately. This is an issue that prevents game play entirely, its just not something they created into the game scripting. It still needs immediate action.
"And you, in fact, are working unconsciously as a proxy for the cheaters. They are probably sitting in their chairs and laughing their ass off, when they read that people now want to cut off features in a game just in favor of an antihack solution."
Really? So if we were to apply this same logic, we shouldn't have ever developed anti-virus programs so the virus creators wouldn't laugh at us for making something to counteract them. We also shouldn't have a military to defend ourselves against foreign forces either so they don't get the enjoyment of knowing that we did this to sleep safely at night.
Adding anti-hack software doesn't cut off features or gut the game out. All they do is monitor for permissible scripts and then kick all others who use scripts that are known hacks or don't meet a user set criteria... That's it!
I've been on Dev, I got tired of only having a few servers to choose from at the best of hours. I don't play wasteland, you shouldn't assume so much.
There is no reason we shouldn't have some form of anti-hack, regardless of the fact if we are playing on dev or not, its not an excuse because you feel you don't have to deal with it.
Shotgun put the point home here. "How can everyone else be so cool about it?"
That's EXACTLY my point. We shouldn't have to wait for the promise of "eventually" having cheat protection. Why on earth should we have to suffer through it during the Alpha stages when the fix is so simple? We'd all be a lot more productive at finding bugs and actually testing the Alpha if we wouldn't have to switch servers every bloody hour.
The hackers know they have us by the short and curlies and they aren't going to stop, it will only get worse from here unless something is done.
Its not? Its a rather large issue I'd say, and something that needs dealing with.
I also don't like the three keys to adjust slow, normal and fast pace. Dosn't feel right when trying to turn with anything by the normal pace keys
Negative. Your solution does not work as described.
I like this idea. Its clunky having to hold ctrl and my up stance key... Not to mention takes longer to do and can't get down quick enough to avoid getting a bullet between the eyes.
So you downvote the issue and tell him off even though you confirm what is happening? I don't understand all the negativity on these issue tracker posts, its like people are all trying to prove they are so much smarter than the other reporters, or like you are trying to show off for BIS in hopes of making mod or something.
If you agree with the issue then leave it at that, let BIS Mod's and Dev's come and close the thread if its a dupe. Don't just down vote it because its a dupe.
But that's the entire point of this ticket, is addressing this issue and plausible solutions, and that's my plausible solution? Why should we have to mod the crap out of the game to get features that should be basic?
Also, I've attempted to repeat this and it isn't very repeatable. Sometimes you will slide right through and other times you will get hung up. I don't think the point of you getting stuck going sideways is to simulate the gun hanging up on the frame, this seems to be more of a bug.
You shouldn't just get stuck though, the rifle should bounce off the wall, or your character lowers his rifle for a moment to get around it automatically. Stuff like this just makes the game clunky when left alone. Upvoted.
Confirmed. Also happens when switching from the rifle to the handgun when prone.
Often when going from handgun to rifle, the character will exessively change postures several times, then just stay standing waiting for a bullet between the eyes before deciding to lay down again. Hugely annoying.
Its just Alpha, I imagine that is coming. Arma 2 had wind, range charts and all kinds of other affects on your bullet, I'm sure that's all coming here too.
Why would that have an impact? The yardage and elevation doesn't change, why would aiming more left or right change the point of impact?
Normally I wouldn't say much more than 5-10 degree's left or right.
The ARCO seems to be off by a lesser degree than the RCO, but I hardly use the RCO so my comments there won't be accurate.
With both the MXM and the EBR (even now that the ammo is fixed) I have similar results for both ammunition striking far low. This is with the ARCO sight and no suppressor.
Ranging the targets by using the ~ key. Lately I've began double checking the range against the map by setting a way point up over the target.
Usually my shots are only low by a few meters, but sometimes its a lot more. Its frustrating when I shoot one target at the 600 pin and then another one at the same range just more to the right and suddenly I need to be aiming more 620 yet the only thing that's changed is bearing.
I haven't changed my FOV, so I don't think the error is coming from there.
I can confirm this.
I snipe frequently in the game (Basically all I do) and I've noticed errors up to 50m before, frequently. An example will be a target registers at 500 yards, yet the bullet lands way low and I need to use just slightly lower than 550 yards (splitting the 500 and 600 marks).
This happens on targets with the same elevation. Obviously being higher or lower than the target will have effects on the bullet.
Well the whole point of speed reload is to get it done fast and even a half second is going to add time to that and make the reload which you already want to happen quickly, more slowly. Maybe if it was a super short delay, because as you mentioned, you only ever tap it to reload normally, a .2 second delay of the sorts would get the job done I figure without interfering with regular operation.
The only issue I would have with holding the key is how long is the delay before the speed reload occurs? This may seem minor but you are losing time in the reload while this delay times out and probably end up with the same reload time.
I agree with the OP here.
I don't think he is talking about trying to shoot them from 1000m back but when making a strafe pass in general. I've used this chopper a lot lately and I find the only real way to hit someone is to zoom in on one infantry and make a pass adjusting excessively as you go to ensure you hit him directly. Its incredibly annoying when you make a pass on 20 infantry all cluttered up and nobody gets hit.
The thing about being shot out of the chopper, I can see if you are really close but I've been shot out of my chopper before while still moving aprox 50km/hr hovering sideways with my glass facing them by a MACHINE GUNNER. I know the glass isn't bullet proof, but its resistant and its got lots of angles on it for a reason.
I'm not saying to make this thing invincible but I do agree it needs some work. The pilot shouldn't have to rely only on rockets to get the job done.
This is a repeat issue and has already been resolved. Check options > game > enable vehicle free look. It should not go straight into free look for the gunner with this enabled.
I agree. Its far too easy to damage the occupants of vehicles even with a moderate landing it for some reasons drains a good bit of HP from your character.
Actually the military does use wing suits... Up voted.
Here here to that. I can hardly get into games any more because of this.
I want to add that I find when a server crashes the game out, its IMPOSSIBLE to get back into that same server for several hours because the game keeps crashing after you select a role and try to start.
Secondly most of the servers don't even let the game content finish downloading.. It will sit there forever trying to finish the download at like 99% completion.
Its really not that hard to program in objects that are step over able into the game... Considering they are adding climbing walls as an option soon, that's going to have to be programmed in. As it is you can attempt to step over something and become stuck, and having it so only the right areas you can vault would make more sense.
And no, you wouldn't have to look directly at the object to vault.. Its easy to program in it that when you are up against it and looking over the object, you have to be doing that anyways to vault properly.
That's not a bad idea either as long as it pops up as the first most immediate action (like how opening a door does) on that menu so you can just action key it.
I completely agree... I find myself coming out into third person view a lot just to see what pose I'm in. I almost feel as if the key system between going prone, crouching and weapon raised movement needs to be re-worked. I don't like how I can't just stand straight up from prone, I have to hit crouch first.
I also wanted to mention that by limiting the team from overcommunicating, and limiting Command chat to only the Team Leader and Group Leaders, it will force people to play as a team and work together as they will have to communicate with the commander in order to see what the bigger picture is, making it more like a real combat situation, not just everyone able to talk to anybody.
Sorry about submitting multiple issues in one, I won't do that again in the future.
Also, my game is installed on another hard disk that isn't my windows install C drive. I checked in the folder you mentioned but its empty.
Do you know where the game would write the crash reports to instead? I'll gladly find this for you, but I'm having no luck as is.
Agree'd with the ability to make custom chat groups, I don't agree with the distortion idea however.
I don't agree with this. Each soldiers reaction to suppressing fire in the real world is different from the next's. Forcing a limitation onto everyone because one person reacts like a.. Well a sissy to being shot at, doesn't mean everyone else needs to suffer.
As other people have commented, ballistics in this game are already insanely deadly, nobody is going to just stay where they are when the bullets start flying.
Just to clear up any confusion here guys, even though I have voted this down, They are asking that it would be a separate key stroke entirely to engage/disengage safety, not cycle through it to get to another fire mode.
I don't fully dis-approve of this idea because I like any additions that come with realism, and weapon status is always a concern in the real deal. I just have trouble justifying it here because this is based on a battlefield where everyone is always ready to shoot and accidental discharges aren't really a big deal because its not like we are occupying a town with civilians for hours on end and as soon as you enter a vehicle you enter essentially a safe mode by not being able to shoot.
I just feel there are already so many key strokes that turn away potential players or frustrate existing ones... I'm going to sit on the middle on this one for now. You all have valid points on this.
Correct, but combat training and drills teach you to always be conscious of what fire mode your gun is on, a normal civilian mind attempting to play a game (who dosn't care if he/she accidentally shoots a fake in game character), won't be thinking about this and will end up dead or cycling needlessly through fire modes. Its already clunky enough as it is trying to get back to semi from full when you have grenades in the tube.
I don't support this idea. It is pointless and will frequently lead to a firearm being on safe when it needed to be off safe. I get the backing behind realism but most people aren't trained on firearms in the real world and this just add's an extra mode and/or key to add to the clunkiness.
These plates are not designed to take a .308 (or 7.62 x 51 if you want to use military munitions) caliber bullet fired from a high powered cartridge. If you are talking a 7.62 x 39 (Thirty-nine) then yes, it will stop a few of those depending on where the plate is hit. Remember, its strength is not static through out, as you get towards the corners, like anything, strength is lost. There are videos and reports by pro's who have tested this stuff that prove that a 7.62 x 51 cartridge will shatter and penetrate this shield of god we keep talking about. You have to keep in mind, we are talking about a cartridge that is 12mm long and thicker, so there is a lot more powder in there which means more velocity. The bullet is also a heavier grain. Lets be specific here, the 7.62 x 39 is typically a 123 grain bullet with a muzzle velocity of on average 2350 FPS. The 7.62 x 51 (.308) is a 147 grain bullet that leaves the muzzle at about 2820 FPS, depending on the countries loading of the cartridge. That may not seem like a huge jump, but thats about 500 FPS additional speed.
Lets look at the math now. Kinetic Energy = .5 x Mass x Velocity squared. The grainage had to be converted to kg, and velocity to m/s. I have not listed these conversions but please, be my guest and check my math.
KE 7.62 x 31 = 4089.06 Joules
KE 7.62 x 51 = 7018.69 Joules
I don't know how many people understand energy but that bullet with a standard load is carrying A LOT of extra force behind it on a bullet designed to penetrate. Saying standard military issue body Armour is good enough to stop this kind of a cartridge is not only a ridiculous statement, it shows a lacking of knowledge in the area.
A glancing blow, an abnormally thick spot in the armour, excessive range etc., can all play into someone getting lucky, and of course there are going to be a few documented cases of a helmet luckily stopping a round short, but they are few and far between for a reason.
And yes, shotguns spread at 1 inch per yard out to their effective range where they sart to just drop to the ground (about 50 yards if you really want to push it). So at 30 yards buck shot will be a 30 inch group. Do you want me to take my shotgun out to 30 yards and shoot a target and post the results for you?
@ Mod Fireball
I hope this isn't going too far, I just cant stand ridiculous statements like this just being regurgitated because its something someone heard or saw once and now its word of law to them.
These updates you want to put in for the armour system are going to make game play quite annoying. People are complaining enough as it is on how many shots it takes to drop another player in game, let alone beefing the armor up even more because we are assuming shots are always going to land on the plates. By doing this you are making a variety of guns in-effective and entirely useless which would put no use to them in game.
Starting with the shotgun, I don't really care how great the new armor is, a shotgun is a close range weapon with most engagements occurring under 30 yards when its utilized properly. That's a lot of energy coming at you in the form of big pellets or one giant projectile. With buckshot by the time it hits it will have spread enough to hit areas outside of that plate not to mention its probably going to break the plate with the energy and number of hits occurring at once. With a slug the effect is probably going to be the same.
Your statement about "if you can't get head shots you have no right in that role" is incorrect and real life snipers aim for center of mass as well. Expecting a rifle to perform 1/2 MOA at 1000 yards (basically the size of a human head) with a moving target including all the effects you need to account for the bullet on the way just isn't going to happen. Stationary, you got a chance, moving, I don't need to say much more. Look-up how your fabled armor does against .308 projectiles or commonly available hunting size cartridges.
All I'm trying to say is to implement an armor system like this into the game where its going to take several shots to kill someone is ridiculous at best. Its frustrating enough with how many times you have to plug someone with certain guns and all this is going to do is protect the odd solider from the odd stray bullet during a quick long range engagement and scoot and make firefights ridiculous. Everyone will just hold down the trigger till their mag is empty, or guys just fighting to close the distance to point blank to defeat the armor. I really don't like what kind of effects this is going to have on the game.
I don't know if I like this idea so much. It sounds like all its going to do is instead of just taking a few shots to kill each other, we're just going to have to pull the trigger more times. Not to mention this is going to completely make the sniper ineffective because he is going to need several rounds to kill an enemy? I don't even believe that's true to real life, you get plugged with a .308 and its going to do something. Whats with the shotgun doing NOTHING? Whats the point in even having it in the game then if you can't even kill someone with it?
I like the thought but this is just going to turn into super soldiers, modern armor is pretty good but really, not THAT good that it stops all bullets...
You sure about that? Pretty sure the M4 and M16 platforms are not a direct impingement, instead are piston driven to keep the fowling out of the chamber.
Grid 047066 is also a place you can walk through. If you move directly south you can exit and enter from the lower formation of the rocks as well.
Up voted, but this is a repeat of an already submitted ticket.
You'd missed some earlier posts, I was speaking in general to what was said before, sorry for the confusion.
It's not like I don't see the point here I'm just tired of this same debate I hear all the time from some in the service. I just personally don't care what they say to be entirely honest, I just have a problem with how the issue is presented and how much we knit pick at things like this.
I'm pretty well done with the conversation on this topic so I'm just going to ignore future posts from here on out because I really don't believe much else is going to be said that will be conducive to the idea.
Okay I want to clarify a couple of things here that I missed earlier. I never once told any of you how to do your jobs, I was only stating my profession and because of it I know proper radio protocol as well. It may not be as stringent as Military protocol but I still know how to use a radio correctly and concisely. So attacks on me about not knowing radio protocol are un-justified.
Secondly, nobody in this game is trying to pretend to be "you" by any means. Playing a game, which I think all of you are forgetting, simulator or not, is entirely different from the real thing. If people wanted to "pretend" to be you, they would state such and act as such, however playing a game that has a military basis is not conclusive enough to state openly that we are all trying to be the cool dudes.
This is the one thing I hate the most about mil-sim games, either as a game or in a real form such as airsoft or paintball and I've seen it time and time again. The "pro's" come in and start tearing everyone a new one about how stuff is done like its a huge deal and talking down to people and then wonder why they ended up out on their ass and why nobody liked them. This isn't the military, it's a simulator, and you cannot make it as strict as the military because none of us are getting paid, in fact we are spending our own time to play the game. So please for the brevity of the rest of us, stop trying so hard.
The entire point of this is that we have civilians playing this game, easily over 90%. I'm not really understanding what the draw is for those in the military to play a simulator and then shortly after tear it apart for inaccuracies on the smallest of details such as how somebody replies to a radio message. The fact that saying "Roger WILCO" results in such a reaction shows perhaps the system is just a little up tight but... That's my personal opinion.
This would be the same as me playing FIRE RESCUE and then after going on the game forums and tearing it apart 80 different ways to Sunday because everything about that game is horrifically wrong. Even the proper Fire and EMS simulators are STILL wrong beyond all measure but I don't go after little details like how the nozzle-man responds to my commands. I just feel we are focusing entirely on small little issues and should focus on bigger things for now, and this really is peanuts.
Most other English speaking countries don't consider this blasphemy though, which is why I don't really know why this is such a big issue to people. I do not think this needs to be changed, and our focus should be on more important issues.
I don't get it.
"Roger" means message has been received
"WILCO" means Will Comply
So even though the US Military doesn't like using this, this is still a correct way to transmit "I received the message and we will carrying out the orders."
So I guess the way the US does things now is just law and the rest of us should follow along? I think the big point behind ARMA is the fact that there are a number of countries involved in the war so a variety of acknowledgement verbatim is perfectly acceptable in my opinion. That and I think arguing over how to say yes is a typical semantics argument and regardless of just saying "Roger" or "Wilco" or "Roger WILCO" accomplishes the same thing and we should just move on with our lives.
Incorrect? We are speaking about one extra word that will take an extra breath to state, and you figure this is going to tie up extra radio traffic?
I'm a Firefighter/EMT by profession, and while our worlds are separated by the job, and we may not be as up tight as the military is on radio comms (apparently), we still believe and enforce a system of clear and concise radio communications. So please, don't attack my knowledge into the matter. In no situation have I been in (let alone other firefighters I know), weather time is of the absolute essence, a mayday or SOME form of a life threatening situation has saying "Roger WILCO" ever, EVER put my life, or the lives of other firefighters and civilians in harms way, nor come close!
I agree with you that comms need to be clear and concise, but we are talking an extra bloody syllable here and it truly is semantics because look at different countries all over the world and how they say "yes" to a transmission. Look up a few posts and see how the individual from the British forces stated they acknowledge a transmission. Just because that's how you were taught DOES NOT mean it is the word of law for the rest of the world.
May 9 2016
Have you ever tried to throw an object through a real window before? Its not always so straight forward, I don't disagree with grenades bouncing off of an intact window.
It actually would have to repeat that information again to the part of the script that listens and repeats audio.
I'm only trying to play the devils advocate here, just being that if we add a lot of little things like this, believe me it starts to bog down servers.
This is a neat idea, but I wonder how this will drag down the performance of the server. The server would have to locate the player making the transmission, take sounds within an x radius and then re-iterate and integrate said sounds into the radio transmission.
Sure, it probably wouldn't be too bad, but I'm concerned with all the feature requests coming in that we need to be careful what ends up in, because if ALL of them end up in, and they all chew up a small percentage of power for use, eventually it adds up.
However I still voted this up because I think this is a pretty neat idea.
You can play coy all you want, you made your intentions pretty clear, and your actions speak louder than the words you are trying to say to me.
I'm on the Dev build right now and I really don't notice much of a change in the sprinting speed, if they tuned it down, it must have been minor because I honestly don't see too much of a difference.
First off, I never stated that I wanted nor agreed with a system that lets you sprint forever, so you can drop that part of your argument right away. You are assuming far too much about me or my traits as a gamer by simply asking that the sprint speed and sprint system be left alone as is. By coming after me and saying I should go find another game shows that you feel yourself some kind of elitist for playing Arma 3, like it makes you more of a hardcore gamer or something, putting you above those who play measly games such as Battlefield 3. The cold reality of it is, that regardless of how simulator this game becomes, its still a game, and you can create a game so close to real life that it replicates every aspect of it, including the parts that annoy the shit out of people RL too, and ruin it.
If you look at the votes, and the comments, more people agree with me on this subject, and we can replicate the parts that really matter, but slowing down a sprint? These are trained and physically fit soilders sprinting to get somewhere quick because they decided a flat out sprint is neccisary. Not to mention the sprint dies off pretty quickly. If you are trying to say they can't sprint sustained for at least 100m with a full ruck, I don't know what reality you live in.
Please don't tell me to go play another game, like I'm not "cut out" for the hardcoreness of being an armchair commando in this game, because we disagree on one aspect of it.
Yes because my dis-interest in taking 5 hours to traverse 500m is a clear indication that I can't hack it. Thank you so much for your insight on this topic, I best go back to COD4 which I never played.
I don't really agree with this one like a lot of other tickets out there. Sure, this is a sim... To an extent. Its still a game and I know we are all out for the most realistic experience possible, but the most realistic experience possible isn't always that fun. I don't think the run is really that excessive because after running for a while you can't run again till you stop and take a break. It helps remove some of the boring parts of playing when you are sprinting to catch up in a safe area.
Sure, if you are going to run in a hot area you probably are going to get killed, but that comes down to game play and I don't think it needs to be slowed down and make the game more annoying.
Its also Frustrating how they can't figure out how to operate a vehicle if their lives depended on it, literally. Sending an AI to drive a vehicle is a death command for anyone in the vehicle and the vehicle itself as they seem to Enjoy ramming things or driving it off cliffs... They also STILL try to get in formation and will run other friendlies over in the process!
I can't say how many times I've tried to get them in a vehicle and watched them drive and back into objects and walls on the way, bust up the tires and engine then hop out and say "Cannot comply."
I know its AI, it won't be perfect, but their path finding sucks and this is 2013, I'm sure we can do better.
Yeah I agree with this... Its pretty stupid that the vehicles explode upon contact, and especially in such a dramatic way. Half the time it is funny to watch when a vehicle tries to spawn on top of another one and the resulting catastrophic explosion takes out a bunch of people, it just isn't really that great to play with.
The second one live vehicle contacts another, its pretty much lights out for both.