- User Since
- Mar 7 2013, 2:53 PM (422 w, 5 d)
May 11 2016
May 10 2016
Agreed, it's already automated on the UAV's seeing (from what i can see) you're in an AI controlled aircraft.
Yea, it was dazzle camouflage but now it appears to be just green/OD camo like how most NATO helicopters are painted.
I did some quick research and the mule appears to have rigid wheels and a operators seat built in on the real prototype.
Try using proxytube or another YouTube proxy based in the us.
I disagree, over long ranges the UGV could be used to transport injured players (though a stretcher variant would make this more useful) or just players who have joined in progress without having to worry about sending another person back in a vehicle to pick them up.
Just set the waypoint and keep moving with your objective and when the player gets into the vehicle set another waypoint to move them to you at 2-3x the speed of walking.
Fixed a few patches ago.
Yea, that was my original motivation behind saying to cut them open and bury the contents/tube so that no one brought up the idea of digging up a 7x1cm tube on an 270km² island.
Hmm, i would say it would be cool to bury them and then be recovered by the enemy and used to misdirect, but who is going to find a buried 5cm chemlight on a 380 square kilometer (however big Altis is) island?
IRL i think they would cut them up to drain the fluid and then bury the liquid/tube.
So, i guess destroy would be the answer.
Yes, and thrown them in campfires, who cares about glass, green spray everywhere!
Hence the bury part.
One of the anim dev's said a while back they looked at this but said they had issues with implementation and it being consistent through various stances from a design point of view.
Forgot about this ticket.
After retrying it appear to be based on the collective.
if you hold throttle up on the way down (even with both the engine and the tail off) it will begin to spin, while if you hold Throttle down, it will begin to sway then even out before landing.
I'll post a video later.
Updated ticket with repo instructions.
+1, Chemlights (especially IR chemlights if added) would be a great IFF feature.
Also the DAGR missiles are laser guided as well and the Laser would be used to lay the cannon (zero) for different ranges.
The reticle you posted is actually what SHOULD be in the OPFOR ARCO, the MRCO looks to be based off the Valdada Pitbull (same design and markings) which uses this reticle: http://usarmorment.com/images/14AD_MED_01.jpg
Right click Arma 3 in steam>Properties>Local Data>Verify Integrity
That should force the update.
We didn't say we want massive recoil, we just want SOME recoil. At the moment there's litterally no recoil at all, just camera shake.
While it is possible to put two rounds through a single hole with the vector (Image to prove it: http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/original/3/33669/1500343-double_tap.jpg) you still shouldn't be firing it like a bench rest.
@Deadfast: Probably due to:
recoil = "recoil_single_SMG_01";
recoilProne = "recoil_single_prone_SMG_01";
recoil = "recoil_burst_smg_01";
recoilProne = "recoil_burst_prone_smg_01";
recoil = "recoil_auto_smg_01";
recoilProne = "recoil_auto_prone_smg_01";
(Replace one with 2 for the scorpion)
By guess is who ever deals with the recoils didn't test recoil_auto.
Also, if you put the suppressor on the recoil works normally...
@dovafox 12-1500 RPM on the Vermin (Irl Vector anyway), primarily due to the recoil reduction system.
And the current issue is there's no vertical recoil, only camera shake, you can literally put a single bullet hole in a target at 300m.
Compared to the video you posted it still needs recoil but at the same time it should probably be lowered in general for both weapons, particuarly seeing the Kriss/Vermin has pretty much no vertical recoil, all of it is directed rearwards:
Example Video of the recoil in game now (give it a little, it has 15 minutes left as of time of posting):
Updated to include the AH-99, dunno how i forgot they're both low observable aircraft...
Resolved, Tones added for lock and missile.
Confirmed, houston, we have a beeping.
Otherway round, IR seekers are 'distracted' by flared, Radar guided are confused by Chaff.
Though we don't have chaff anyway at the moment.
I don't know at what stage the lock/firing is detected but pretty much all aircraft have sensors that can detect the launch and fire countermesures, for US helicopters this is the CMWS, usually in combination with the ALQ-144 jammer there's other various systems too for LASER and radar detection.
DAGR's are tab locking missiles and you get 24 of them... they're more than adequate to deal with armor.
I can't find the thread but on the BI forums one of the developers said it wasn't going to happen due to having to create around 100-200 or so new animations and something like 1500 changes to different configs and models.
...Well, i am a giddy goat...
The weapon is textured on the side to read '.45 ACP', i think it's pretty clear it should be using .45 rounds.
Also the weapon was not designed for armor penetration and has nothing to do with the caliber choice of the weapon.
"^I doubt that! They had it in ArmA2."
Yea, i was just trying to find some way to justify it to my self...
@Laqueesha no idea on the model but on the two kimbers it's based on it's a 7rnd mag.
Found in the A3 Beta known issues:
-Vermin SBR has wrong ammo description - it uses .45 ACP but description says 9mm
-ACP-C2 uses wrong ammo - it should use .45 ACP but uses 9mm
So i suppose they didn't have time to research and implement the round in time.
Ah, after looking again i see what you mean now.
I guess both are custom order pistols so you could end up with it either way.
If you want to be so anal, i'll ammend the post to state i would like it in 11.43×23mm [.45 Automatic] round...
Also i am aware the 1911 frame has been made in 9x19mm even back in the 1940's. But apart from being less popular and many armies looking to go back from 9x19mm to .40 or .45 rounds, the pistols the weapon is based off in game is only available in 11.43x23mm
Either way, i made a ticket for the Vector/Vermin too:
Resolved in prior update.
If someone could go ahead and close this that would be great...
Check the post date, I posted this one earlier, technically his is the duplicate, though he has more votes.
AH-99* Damn you and your unique but similar names...
You asked for a MP editor and there already is one, ergo, the ticket is obsolete.
If you want a Real time editor (place objects and items without having to exit from being playable) that's a little different and you should be more detailed with your description.
You already are able to.
Navigate to /My Documents/Arma 3 - Other profiles/[Arma3 profile name]/missions
and create a folder called 'MPMissions' place the depbo'ed mission into this folder
(Or create the mission, save as usermission and move it from /My Documents/Arma 3 - Other profiles/[Arma3 profile name]/missions to the 'MPMissions' folder)
then start a online game in the browser and you should see the mission in blue, down the bottom there should be an 'Edit' button, click this and the people in the lobby will be placed on a 'Mission editing'/'Receiving data' (dunno what the screen is for A3) screen while you are in the editor, once done, hit save and then run it...
The Havoc can carry 3 passengers in a crew compartment behind the cockpit, it's accessed via a small door behind the weapons pylons.
I recall somewhere a BI dev saying for TOH they brought in a physicist to help them put together all the info for each helicopter for RotorLib (Which isn't being included in A3, otherwise i guess they could port over the content for the relevant aircraft) and that it took around a month for each aircraft...
That could be why... particularly when they're in what is a closing deadline for when ever they have it set (i assume seeing they're now in Beta which is the final testing stage they're aiming for a sept-nov time frame).
Ever get the feeling we'd save all this hassle if BI just had a pilot as a consultant?
"And RAH-66 can not do fly sideways as high speeds as KA-50 and KA-52 because the tail rotor does not have enough power for it without losing lift and for other direction it is even less powerful. "
See above, the test pilot at Sikorsky who flew the RAH-66 said it could turn 90 degrees and maintain it's original speed at 100 knots [185 kph] which is what i would call a 'high speed' considering the current speed to turn 90 degrees is about 60 kph :P
"It still generates more noise because tail rotor and that tail rotor can catch up vortex ring as well losing whole helicopter controlling, what doesn't happen so easily with coaxial."
I didn't say it generates no noise, just less noise due to it having more blades and being in an enclosed system.
As for Vortex ring state, i can't find any were that specifically states you can't get VRS in a coaxial system, the only info i've found is that tandem systems like the CH-47 have to slide out horizontally and that intermeshing rotors can get it but cancel each other out quickly.
Though from the above i doubt we'll ever see VRS in Arma, it's not really that important.
"a coaxial rotor doesn't mean the helicopter can 360 at all speeds."
We never stated at all speeds, but it can turn on a completely 180 (Obviously it would be losing forward momentum) at higher speeds than a regular helicopter
"The Comanche's ability to fly sideways up to 100 knots from forward flight is a special feature, which probably gives a great power boost to the tail rotor."
It's not a 'special' feature, it's due to the higher power from the tail rotor due to it using a fenstron tail rotor or fantail which gives the aircraft a reduced noise profile and higher power for greater efficiency.
Either way, there's evidence above showing this, can we focus on improving this in game which it's already worse than a regular helicopter anyway.
If you would like i could even try and contact some local MD500 (Commercial MH6) pilots to ask their input about turning at speed if you REALLY want.
The BO105 used in the first video has a reputation for being highly manuverable and is used by over 24 different militaries.
And i wouldn't call it a pipe dream:
Despite being many times heavier than many helicopters, especially the MH-6 (The aircraft which a is the key focus here) it can still be quite agile.
I see where you're coming from but when you have a small, light helicopter which could currently roll into the ground from 100 or so meters and IRL you see helicopters doing stuff like
or this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_Ycnk1FDWQ
Where you can see rather rapid turns at speed and rather quick stops without gaining/losing any altitude.
You can see why people bring up a discrepancy in the flight models when in game trying to stop or turn that quickly would either be impossible or result in the helicopter ending up in the side of a hill.
Agreed with all points.
The AH/MH-6's feel like they handle like a blackhawk, IMO, before this update they were perfect.
Same with the RAH-66/AH-99, or just yaw speeds in general.
Nick Lappos, The chief test pilot (I.e he was the one who flew the damn thing every day) at Sikorsky during the FANTAIL and Comanche programs stated the following about the about the Comanche: "the fantail, which replaces a conventional tail rotor is powerful enough that a northbound Comanche traveling at 100 knots [185 kph] could be pointed east, west or south while the aircraft while the aircraft still travels north" and then goes on to explain this ability to point weapons independent of the aircraft's velocity was a important attribute in future air combat...
can't repo, could you be a little more descriptive of 'fly up'? or post a video?
To my knowledge the AI skill sliders and setting the AI via the .arma3alphaprofile on a deticated server is ignored.
I've already discussed this with Dwarden, the game ignores the values set in the profile file.
As a temporary fix until the server and slider's work again, accuracy can be changed by adding:
_x setSkill ["aimingAccuracy", 0.2]} forEach allUnits;
To a missions Init.sqf, where the units accuracy can be between 0.1 and 1, 0.2-0.4 is usually pretty good.
I can be done, it was done for some WIP progress units for arma 2 that i was working with but we came up with the problem of not being able to turn them off.
May 9 2016
Still currently an issue.
@Relovance, i'm reffering to what the Nato units wear in Arma 3, not IRL :P
Crye CAGE: http://i4.minus.com/jbmGUvk3vTOrM8.jpg
Boron Carbide Cermaic* not two different materials, i typed it wrong.
@Scorpion, at the current stage NATO use Crye Precision CAGE plate carriers which contain only a front and back ESAPI plates (Cermaic and Boron Carbide) but not side or crouch plates.
While the Iranians appear to only wear webbing, but due to the usual design of their uniform, i guess their uniforms may be woven with Kevlar, but they wouldn't be able to take much more than a pistol round with only a Kevlar weave
Ugh, fuck sake, nothing productive is coming of 90% of these comments, clearly the devs are workin on this so can one of the moderators cut down the amount of useless posts?
The Development build received a update today that the regular version did not.
Movement speed tweaking deployed for evaluation
"It seems these guys are Olympic track stars; they run too far and too long before tiring out."
Well, they ARE US special forces...
We'll never have an agreement here on what level of stamina is correct so perhaps leave it as it, and use the fancy things BIS put in called 'scripting commands' and change it manually.
You know, i don't know about you guys who may have never left your computer desk but i can easily hit 10 on a beep test, the entry standard for special forces (which is what the NATO units are based on, US SF) is 10.1 and a 10km run in 40 minutes (17kph constantly), and if you actually looked into the stamina of Arma units you can run sprint for a maximum of around 200m on flat ground in around 42 seconds, which is 17kph so i don't see any problem with any of the speeds, perhaps the animation speeds but due to the animations being focused on weapon readiness and CQB as most people requested that's how they look.
-1 from me.
Also, the data used for the stamina in game is based off of military fitness standards obtained from an army fitness trainer.
I am referring to 'Jump out', it's just always been labeled on the Action menu as 'Eject', mods have changed it to Jump out in the past though.
IMO, Great idea of holding it longer to activate it but the grenade power should be left alone.
The problem with Arma in the past was getting the appropriate amount of power for the right distance or getting it through a window without it falling short or bouncing back, i think now that its a stable power you get used to the power over time and are able to be more accurate with your throws.