- User Since
- Mar 5 2013, 9:30 PM (382 w, 3 d)
Jan 19 2020
This would be sweet.
May 10 2016
Not having a full stamina bar with a vest/my gun tells me the stamina system needs a lot of work or it needs to go.
I still manage to somehow walk through walls while using my bipod/such.
Dyslexcis version would be a lot better.
Repro steps, if any.
Even established armies can be jammed, ease dropped on & have their messages decoded/translated. It's been going on for years.
Not when it comes to a radio tower being used for communications.
Hence the point of bases, FOBs, etc.
Let me rephrase the jamming part, it wouldn't be on a per person basis.
In all likely hood it would be with some type of gadget which would either be used from a vehicle or placed somewhere more than likely.
Not to mention everything is up to the mission editor.
Ender, look into military tech at current.
We're already slated to get drones at release. BI might of already thought of some of these things.
Seems to me you two have been living in the dark ages.
Pilot, you're completely wrong, not all radio messages are encrypted either. The US, Britain, etc. have intercepted the taliban, translated it, etc.
In every major war Electronic warfare has played a part. Information warfare plays an even bigger part ever since WWII.
You could place a jamming device on a radio tower or the like pilot.
Everything is based on the mission editors choice.
Hacking the turrets was just a spitball idea, though i'm guessing most "common" missions won't utilize turrets too much.
Negating the ability of a soldier to use their radio ingame, in the case we had something similar to ACRE, taking a vehicle out of commission or taking down some of the land drones we'll see later in the game, yea i'd say that'd make a big difference.
Speaking of non automatic drones, explain to me why there's going to be an autonomous drone in the game later as suggested by earlier screenshots.
This is covering the full scale of EW, not just Aerial, those were just the best examples which are pretty common knowledge/easy to source.
All you need is a helmet sending electrical pulses to simulate just about anything.
Underground was confirmed till the AI sabotaged yet another masterpiece which would of made ArmA 3 stand out just that much more from its predecessors.
Fight me Vespa.
They technically if they wanted to could make the whole map diggable up top a few feet or 8 to make trenches all around the map via pre designation, aside from places which have buildings, possibly roads etc. Unless they wanted to allow us to destroy roads, which I doubt due to AI pathing.
I was just pointing out how I look at how they should plan it out sheamus.
IF anything i'd rather they work with ArmA 3 for the next 5-7 years, then move on to a new engine for their next game. This one looks like it'll be able to stay current for a while.
However BIS needs to stop dragging their feet in the sand about using old tech to save money.
Back on topic.
For the sand bags & what not. We should probably make a new ticket about deploying objects for combat support or something along those lines.
Death you're proving you know nothing about engines.
Coding is not universal.
They are using a coding language that went out of date years ago.
Modern engines use C++ mostly, which allows you to do just about anything.
We're all aware of the engine being the same, but you don't seem to understand there are a lot of things behind held back due to the engine being so hard to work with at times.
The scripting language is coming up short in a lot of areas which they wanted to/could have expanded in.
Taskman, you're wrong. They were going to implement underground but due to the fact the AI was having a hard time with it they decided not to. Similar to almost every other awesome idea they were going to implement.
Underground is in VBS2. It's not hard to implement into the engine itself, it's hard to get it working well with the AI.
They need to scrap this engine once they're done & create a better one which can go into the future & compete. Too many legacy problems.
While the scripting language is probably great for them, it's holding them back in a lot of places.
The way A3 is shaping it, it could hold out for 5-7 years if they just support it with some decent DLC's worth buying this time.
DLC's which come with real islands.
I'd settle for sandbag placement better than ACE especially with hedge hog steel/barbwire.
Would work as a pretty decent substitute to digging.
Ontop of that, it would be nice to build a small personal protective structure/put on a roof/camo over an HMG with user layed sandbags.
Unless i'm wrong, which there is a good chance there is. VBS uses some outside tech for AI & other things.
Indeed it would, VBS2 has a lot of nice features which i've always wanted in ArmA.
Probably due to them wanting to keep the teams seperate/projects.
Some things in VBS they have to get licensed.
Sand bags are used in temporary fighting positions and often to rest your weapon on.
Ever see an LP/OP or even snipers sitting in a building putting sandbags up to use for cover/bracing?
Ever see people digging ditches to make temporary fighting positions?
Death you're wrong yet again.
WWI, soldiers dug trenches within 100M of each other.
I'm also pretty sure we'd lay wire, hedgehog steel & other types of traps/deterrents such as digging foxholes right before the enemy shows up if we had the chance.
You'd be suprised how many people would use the feature.
Not everyone plays a mission for 5-30 mins.
Some missions go on for hours or more.
It's not a mod thing dog.
Everyone in the community needs to get out of the "Lets shove things off onto modders" mentality.
There are some things that could or should be in the base game so the modding community can BUILD upon them.
Most of the mods i've seen that were well done were done to make up for a non existent solid foundation to build upon. That should not be the case, BI should lay the foundation & the modders should build upon it. Most of the thing's being asked in tickets are pretty straight forward & simple that have been done in mods. Some of which should have been priority 1 before DLCs.
Atleast let me dig a ditch to sleep in that way if I get shot it's less work for the enemy.
VBS2 has the ability to do underground structures & you guys were considering it a while back.
Having the ability to dig 2-4 feet into the ground probably wouldn't be that bad of a compromise, that'd be about deep enough to make a personal firing hole. NVA style tactics.
We're not asking for spider holes atleast.
Also would be nice to dig entrenched positions into the sides of mountains/such.
B00tsy if you can't change a map & only add to it, then how is it that heavy explosive rounds tend to make craters? OR vehicles exploding near/on the ground.
Wanted to see this for a long time, glad someone posted it.
If they were to do this & it gets enough attention maybe we'll get underground structures back.
Sounds like bull maxy, ACE has done it, other mods have done it. A lot of the systems in arma are archaic/need to be gutted anyway.
Boid stop trolling or go away.
You know that 1500M is around 1 mile right?
The french army. . .
The whole arguement against weapons in the 2ndary slot other than launchers/backpacks went out the window when ACE did it.
Wasn't referring to live leaks nor have I been to the site.
It's not a matter of personal preference so much as personal freedom. A smart person would only have the minimum required as to be able to move faster, while someone whose a mule, breacher, etc. may carry more equipment.
You keep looking at things from the closed box view of every other game i'm assuming you play.
As I stated before in ArmA everything in the mission aside from terrain/preplaced objects is based upon what the mission editor puts in the mission. The mission editor can allow/disable anything or simply not put it in at all. Such as the mission editor not wanting you to be able to have a HMMWV, they can do that. If they want to give you an assortment of guns at the start they can. If it's a SOU type mission and they want some players to have a 2nd gun for CQB/Medium engagements such as a diver team, breacher, combat engi, sniper, etc. they can.
It's not about your personal preference, it's about the mission designers.
armapirx, that is essentially what we've been trying to get at this whole time. It's been done in ACE already before.
To my knowledge most of the anti material rifles don't allow you to carry a backpack/AT anyways as it is, same goes for some of the machine guns. Thus previous points overruled.
You are aware that the mission designer sets up what is/isn't in the mission right.
Not everything is basic infantry, SF/SOU, etc. are in the series, some people go beyond just infantrymen.
Seems you're over complicating the situation.
The whole idea is instead of being required to carry a backpack to carry a 2nd weapon that you pick up or start with, or however you acquire one. You should be able to grab a 2nd weapon if you so choose to carry one with you without the need of a backpack, you won't magically carry more ammo, you'd have to divide things up accordingly with what you're carrying. Especially if you're not carrying a backpack.
For a real world example of situations which this pertains to the Seals sometimes will carry an MP5 as a back up with a silencer along side an M4 or some other type of weapon.
Snipers as you mentioned sometimes will carry a carbine/rifle with them if they're going out alone or with just one other person, they might even use a drag bag.
You're breacher/Combat engi may carry a shotgun for breaching.
Overall the point is to allow people to use the launcher/backpack slot for a 2nd weapon if they so choose to. This isn't Battlefield, call of duty, or any other locked down game. It's ArmA, where the mission designer decides how things will be set up & can even lock things down if they really want to, however ArmA is about freedom of choice.
You two are aware there is a fatigue system in the game/weight right? The more you carry the faster you drop/slower you move or you won't be able to carry over a weight capacity all together.
Boid, how about sharing with the class your vast experience.
Obviously Relovance, you didn't read through the comments & notice that was directed at Sarlac.
At max, there should only really be 2 weapons carried w/ the option for a pistol, unless you packed something light in a backpack.
But have you seen the police dual wielding pistols, that's the important question.
Seems you're getting your panties in a bunch over a joke/semi serious comment about pistols.
Have you not seen SWAT DUAL WIELDING M9s!!?!?!?!?
Lets not get Halo up in here now Kol9yn.
I want to be able to dual wield M9s.
You've been overruled sarlac.
You are being excomunnicated for being too hard.
Until they allow us to mule out the FNG's with tri pods & mortars I am not happy.
Have you tried the AI overhaul mods?
There's been a lot of them since ArmA 1 that had AI using buildings.
Been done via mods, i'm sure the devs can figure it out at some point.
Just came to my mind that Dyslexci has a video where he's nearly hovering & using fixed guns, with foot pedals and what not but you can do so, however hovering and trying to shoot will only work for a few seconds before momentum takes its toll.
You probably could tilt the helo a bit without getting too much momentum but you have to use the cockpit tools.
When it comes to the situation of fixed guns, helicopters strafe. Ever seen the ending of BHD with the LB runs? Sitting still & using them is pretty suicidal, there are some situations they might do it, however in the overall spectrum of combat they'll be doing strafes.
It'd be a lot easier to me if they just did it the way way AA use to do things for moving tactically/moving faster which also changed your interactions all with the click of a button, namely Alt.
Would be easier than tying up the already archaic action menu.
They could have done what AA3 did with Combat & Tactical mode for moments such as that.
Getting in quicker with the door open was meant to outline if we had this implemented, it'd be faster to enter a vehicle when the door is open compared to when it's closed.
If doors were animated on vehicles/vehicles were better modelled and working in tandem we'd be in business.
Personally I feel people should close the door on their own while getting in/out.
Whether the door is open should also have an affect on how fast you can get in/out.
Getting out of a vehicle in reality takes longer than it does in game Sheamus.
Or robban it should play out like this
Open door > Get in/Out > !?!??!?! profit
It's not that hard to comprehend and it is not going to interfere too much with your gameplay if the door is set up to block bullets. It's 1 tiny step towards realism.
You're not playing call of duty or any other game that just holds your hand.
Put your big boy pants on.
Link said other tickets which are somehow related to this ticket.
It wouldn't just be eye candy if a door was able to keep me from taking a bullet in the face as i'm exiting the vehicle from a sniper or small arms fire.
Takes quite a few bullets to blow up a vehicle unless you're using .50 or above.
Spotter hanging out the door is a bit far fetched compared to having an HQ/Intel helo circling with a cam in it, radar, etc.
I was disappointed when people discussed it so heavily at the start of A2 and it was never implemented.
Not sure what the hell you just said. But I don't want mods to fix everything that should be in the game by default or things that could really enhance gameplay.
Leaving features that enhance gameplay out to dump it off on modders is just lazy.
Maybe you should try checking the time stamps Keragon.
Opening the door first would be an interesting thing to do, though I wouldn't be suprised to see a mob of people whining about opening a door before being able to go through it.
Americas Army was all about door warfare. We didn't open them half the time, we'd shoot through them or crack them & listen for people opening em.
If it ever gets implemented I expect you to make a ticket for that.
That's my whole point Kol, that's tied into steam, thus they'd have to block steam all together.
How do you expect them to block Steam if it's required to run the game and all again?
To straighten things out as always, who gets the long range radio is up to the mission designers.
Technically we have a radio, the problem currently is it's miniscule role in the game at current, most of which is for the AI to relay very useless info.
Integrating ACRE as a straight copy/paste wouldn't work due to the fact ACRE is reliant on TS for a number of it's features. ACRE was also done by a team, not one person & some of them are busy now a days.
roger most of that has nothing to do with ACRE & more to do with closing off the freedom the mission designer has with the editor.
In ACRE each group can grab a group radio & set a channel to use, solves a lot of problems.
The tickets not asking for user made scripts, the whole ticket is to implement ACRE itself or a similar solution into the engine to simulate radios thus removing the need for ACRE to be developed by the community to fix a problem with a lacking VOIP option.
Even if someone had the scripts & what not TS was integrated for a reason. To make up for the lack of the engine itself to simulate some of the things done via TS.
Dropping TS & having it all gameside would be great.
Kol9yN, please think what you're saying through before posting, my eyes are on fire & that post made me want to gouge them out.
The whole problem that really holds them back a lot of the time is most people are too lazy to figure out how to use even semi complicated things now a days.
If it dosen't work when you press a button the general masses don't want to use it.
ACRE isn't dependant on ACE blood. It's stand alone, but supports ACE.
That's the idea is to have BIS integrate something like ACRE into the game itself, however TS is not likely to disappear anytime soon.
Would be nice not having to rely on TS though for an ACRE implementation to work.
Disagree with the scanning for channels, most of the squad level radios do just require a dial/button to be turned.
People that don't know how to use it will.
I have no idea how to use it, but i've always wanted to. There's plenty of videos/communities that train people how to use them.
They could implement an official tutorial if they implement it.
If people don't use VOIP this dosen't effect them in any way.
There was a rumor that BIS was looking into an ACRE like implementation previously.
I'm sure more people would run it if they knew how to set it up & pubbies ran it more.
I've seen quite a few servers in A2 that ran it.
Why would they disable the ability to use direct chat aka not filling radios with random bickering?
It really dosen't suck.
If it was built into the game that would remove the need for people to use Teamspeak as a way to get around bad VOIP quality, hence why it started happening in the first place.
An ACRE/real simulated radio system would get rid of the juggling radio channels, add immersion, increase simulation, makes things even more fun, encourage teamwork (Especially in PvP as it does) & improve the overall quality of the game.
The whole thing with how ACRE works though, is you need the right radio for the job. Not all the radios reach across the map, from what I remember the longest range infantry radio only goes 10Km on the ground, 40 if you were in a vehicle, but I haven't kept up with ACRE.
That in turn takes up a backpack slot, most people are carrying the squad level radios which cover a 1 mile or two.
Die hard or not I remember reading some articles that even people playing DayZ wanted something like ACRE, everyone i've ever known to use it loves it due to the fact it erases some of the side chat spamming & adds new challenges.
I'm going to assume some of you have never really looked into ACRE/used it.
It simulates radios.
You can have a squad level radio, a fire team radio & a radio for long distance communication, thus it serves a purpose for everyone, getting to the point of being able to use it might be harder but in the end it would improve the experience everyone playing the game walks away with. Not one game to date has implemented such a system, the mod itself is a work of art.
You don't need to get complicated with it, however you could do some wizardly things with it if you so choose.
Where'd my drag/carry go?
You could Nicolli to an extent, but triggers tend to cause lag the more of them you put in & it's easier if it's scripted into the engines code.
Lyko, those animations have been there since ArmA 2, possibly 1 or even OFP.
After thinking about what I just typed & then reading my ticket, not sure why I made the ticket currently other than the fact the Alpha lacked the features.
They didn't in A2, doubt they do now.
If I wanted your vote i'd run for public office. Seeing as i'm not doing so and I enjoy being an asshole too much, i'd settle for you making me a sandwich and voting for the ticket cage.
How do TKs and dragging bodies have anything to do with each other?
None the less kid, I still want my Splinter Cell mod & I still want to be able to drop a body out of a sky scraper to dispose of it.
Delete the directory folder & reinstall from a different source.
Have you tried to lower you're settings & disable shadows/Post processing jaskra? AMD dosen't make the greatest processors & while you may want that fixed quickly, some of us have been wanting things fixed for years with ArmA.
Yet to see proof provided of more than 4 core utilization.
Protip, I don't know a game to this day that uses more than 4 cores, people that waste money on 6-8 cores for gaming ar wasting money.
If you want it to "attempt" to use those cores then type -cpu=8 or something along those lines, i'm sure you can google it into your start up.
Other then that, AMD processors at current are not running the game well, so you've got the short end of the stick atm.
They're aware of it boys and girl, have been for a bit.
This sounds pretty entertaining, got a video?
May 9 2016
ACE seems to have it currently disabling the text/the voice removed all together. I believe there's a script command for it, would be lovely if it was in by default.
Cut their losses when it would just take some tweaking with the values of the physics, really?
It's the 6th day not even a week in, use your brain.
Do you have your ingame sound turned down?
Devs know about it.
The sentence you put into repro dosen't help & that is not how you write repro steps.
post a video if possible.
If you set the AI to careless they will disregard orders & do as they please.
If you set it to safe they will stick to the road (Vehicles).
Describe weak driving in detail.
Set the infantry WP's off the road & in the grass.
Option B) Reset stance upon switching to standing, crouch or prone.
Did you tweak the health on the units at all?
Oinky if you're not helping stop posting.
It's a known bug in the dev branch build. You run the risk of a more broken build by using it.