I read your link Brian,but I dont get the point you are trying to make. Really thought the physics calculations were done by physx? If not on the gpu then on the cpu.

I guess this fact would enable a great implementation of fastroping instead of the strange "Ladder attached to chopper" solution that was implemented in A2OA.

We have physx now. Should be possible.

What do you mean its yet to be enabled? Isn't it what is ingame atm? -nosplash is just a command to remove the splash screen before the engine loads the game.

@Kol9yN

Sounds nice, but this should be done from the ground up in the engine. We should have tracing so that you only interact with whatever you look at and not something behind you.

This is so much needed and it's right in line with the idea of making the game more fluid.

Please keep spreading the word on this ticket. I don't think we should be satisfied with the current broken solution.

This is not something that can be modded at a later stage by the community. This has to be done by the developers and it has to be done right.

Well I guess choosing what menu should appear when using HoldAction key is not the most pressing matter. I just hope BI works out a much more simplified system for interacting with self and world. It makes sense to do this now that they took the first steps with smoothing gameplay and accessibility.

A simple tabaction and HoldAction ked setup would be nice for the interactive items currently ingame. Match it up with a better method of tracing what the player is looking at (current system is broken) and er would have a much smoother experience.

How is some menu unusable for some people? Everyone with a mouse should be able to use one?

@Demongornot

With respect of your idea, I think sticking with 1 ticket with multiple mockup ideas has a better chance of being looked at than multiple seperate tickets.

Also your ticket will probably be reviewed since it is connected to this one.

Intuitive interaction menu with objects. (Highlighting along the lines of what Nicolii has made a very nice mockup of http://db.tt/CTZkSYOS (Maybe twistking could add that to the description of this ticket))

Some kind of easy menu for self interaction. I like radial menus as they could also be used for external objects when the object has more than one use (E.g. hold "E" to choose between "Get in" or "View cargo" of an vehicle whereas the quick tab of "E" would choose the default and most used action "Get in".

@Nicolii

Good mock-up indeed. That is exactly what we need. Maybe even less intrusive, but even with that system I seriously don't see how it could degrade the game to a common COD fps.

I see a system like that adding immensely to the fluidity of gameplay.

The actionmenu has to go. It has never worked from a gameplay perspective.

Again these comments seem to revolve around whether or not A2 content is important or if you rather want to buy the existing assets as an DLC.

What Kju is talking about concerning AiA is so much more than simple assets and he is fighting for this ticket because he can see how relatively little is keeping it from being realized.

What about making a video, Kju? To explain it all. Hell if Dslyecxi could make one it would help gaining momentum, if not just creating overview.

I voted to support this. I'm not sure if everyone who are critical about this idea really understand how much time and effort has been put into projects. One can take a quick look at i44,cwr2 or just the sea of models that has been released.

It's not at all impossible to rearrange so that these great projects can live on. As someone mentioned before, it would be a waste to just throw away the TREMENDOUS amount of work the community has done so far.

How many of these great modifications will be lost? I personally, would love to play i44 in the new engine A3 has brought us, but I doubt a lot of modders has the "Free" time to rebuild it.

@Kol9yN

Sounds nice, but this should be done from the ground up in the engine. We should have tracing so that you only interact with whatever you look at and not something behind you.

This is so much needed and it's right in line with the idea of making the game more fluid.

Please keep spreading the word on this ticket. I don't think we should be satisfied with the current broken solution.

This is not something that can be modded at a later stage by the community. This has to be done by the developers and it has to be done right.

Well I guess choosing what menu should appear when using HoldAction key is not the most pressing matter. I just hope BI works out a much more simplified system for interacting with self and world. It makes sense to do this now that they took the first steps with smoothing gameplay and accessibility.

A simple tabaction and HoldAction ked setup would be nice for the interactive items currently ingame. Match it up with a better method of tracing what the player is looking at (current system is broken) and er would have a much smoother experience.

How is some menu unusable for some people? Everyone with a mouse should be able to use one?

@Demongornot

With respect of your idea, I think sticking with 1 ticket with multiple mockup ideas has a better chance of being looked at than multiple seperate tickets.

Also your ticket will probably be reviewed since it is connected to this one.

Intuitive interaction menu with objects. (Highlighting along the lines of what Nicolii has made a very nice mockup of http://db.tt/CTZkSYOS (Maybe twistking could add that to the description of this ticket))

Some kind of easy menu for self interaction. I like radial menus as they could also be used for external objects when the object has more than one use (E.g. hold "E" to choose between "Get in" or "View cargo" of an vehicle whereas the quick tab of "E" would choose the default and most used action "Get in".

@Nicolii

Good mock-up indeed. That is exactly what we need. Maybe even less intrusive, but even with that system I seriously don't see how it could degrade the game to a common COD fps.

I see a system like that adding immensely to the fluidity of gameplay.

The actionmenu has to go. It has never worked from a gameplay perspective.

I have a hard time understanding how to program the AI? Do you mean more variables than Skill?

Isn't this a duplicate of the same bug as in A2? Where double tapping the opposite direction fixed the "keep running" bug?

I don't know if it works, but ACE mod currently has sparebarrels for MG's. I would like to see it in A3, but honestly I don't think BI will be the ones implementing it.

Upvoted though.

Maybe have them only return fire when fired upon?

Euphoria engine was, imo, the best ragdoll enhanced system I've seen to date. That said it is prob. unrealistic to implement in more that one way.

I also get that most lethal hits from calibers used in this game wouldn't transfer a lot of momentum.

But, at the moment it would be nice to see factors like movement speed and turnrate to influence the ragdoll "animation".

Well to start off they could remove the bend animation from the biggest tree classes. Then tweak it later on if needed.

That shouldn't take a lot of time.

This might be a problem in the campaign if similar scenarios occur. I can see why dynamic pip might not be feasible, but maybe you could design the mission to use markers (on hud and/or map) if the game isn't running with Pip enabled. Couldn't that be scripted?

Yes that is indeed a good prototype system. I remember seeing that when the videos were released.

I hope the developers will implement some of the basic ideas.

Up voting

Isn't this a duplicate? http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=2452

Better add comments for that issue and upvote. Its already 3rd in the voted issues.

Yes it actually worked very good in A1 with ACE.

Now that we have this improved light engine this feature should be added. I don't believe it would be any big hassle to implement. Also adding different intensities depending on caliber should be worked out.

I don't think its something BIS should focus on. Sure the maps and items are nice, but I'm sure it'll get worked out by modders and groups like e.g. AllInArma.

The future plans of BIS game Arma 3 wil prob. be something we, in the end, want ported over to future Arma games. And it'll prob. happen in the same way as it has been handled in the past. Modders.

Isn't there something like this ingame already? The diamond indicator of team players?

Also the shacktac variant of the squad radar is very useful and greatly increases the fireteam situational awareness and promotes teamplay.

I do hope the AI gets changed or optimized. On another note does anyone know if the idea of HC setups will be included tweaked? It just seems like almost all the shortcommings of Arma OA are still present in A3.

As Christian K wrote. When you have Arma 2 in a realistic setup with ACE, inventory/ammo awareness becomes a part of the gameplay. Just as it would be in a real life situation.

I think a duck in vehicles would be great. Don't think it would be too hard to include, but it needs work through animations.

I have a hard time seeing dual wielding being relevant to a military simulator. It seems more fit for a game genre with less focus on realism.

This would prob. fit better in the possibilities of the modding realm.

Also if you would like it for DayZ I think you should open a feature request for that game, since this tracker is not linked to DayZ.

Sorry, but I'm not voting up on this one.

I think choppers could use some love in A3 in terms of damage modelling. It would be nice to be able to see rotors being destroyed.

It would be amazing if the rotors could be added as physx elements.

Maybe you could "easily" emulate rotors flying off by still having the current state of them just disappearing, but when damaged enough "spawn" rotor wing objects with physx and make them fly off. It might be an easier method than having rotors as actual physx elements attached to the chopper.

Dunno if its the same as TOH since I haven't played it, but I play with trackIr and I can ctrl+movemouseleft and then lean with trackIr to look out and down to the side of the chopper.

I think you can rebind the keys to make it work.

THIS SHOULD BE CLOSED. IT IS CAUSED BY CTRL+MOUSEMOVEMENT AND IS NOT A BUG.

@BlackLord its OT, but that made my day ^^

This would open to a great deal of variety.

On one end of the spectrum: Think of a mission set on Greenland with sides fighting for territory because of oil. White as far as the eye could see and, except for your clothing and camuflage, only terrain to mask your movement.

On a more relevant/realistic note, playing in Siberia like settings could also be amazing.

Snowstorms that limit your view distance and dynamic effects with trees being covered in snow.

I'm in. Sign me up.

I'm not able to reproduce. Not even with what Esro is stating.

Maybe add some logs if you are able to generate solid reproduce.

I think the servers have been crashing randomly since the last update.

Usually "no message received for x seconds" means that the server has crashed.

Well I guess this is about a balance of realism and accessibility. I have always liked the way watch, compass etc. is portrayed ingame, so i'm voting against.

I like this idea. What I think is that the way soldiers exterior looks should be revamped in some areas. I would like to see more dynamic exterior looks from e.g. different wounds, but also as already noted, water, dirt (wear from combat) etc.

I also get if BIS cannot prioritize this, but I'm sure they like all the ideas from the community. Just hope modders like the ACE community keep an eye on the feedback tracker.

I haven't noticed the effect looking bad or unrealistic, but ill try and pay attention.

Also as Tasty wrote, I don't think this should be high priority since it is not near being a gamebreaking element.

I don't think it's a planner feature atm. Wasn't created in Arma or Arma 2 and neither in OA. I saw a modder creating something for door charges in A2,but I would love if BI made it possible to plant explosives on vehicles.

More so being able to breach doors would be amazing since we now have a much more usable physics engine.

Come on now stop with the BLUEFOR is IDF. BLUFOR is NATO in Arma 3 and NATO isn't IDF.

You also posted in the main female/male post about this should have female models since the game is built around IDF.

This is a duplicate at best.

I like your idea. It's well thought out and reasonable. Voting for the attention of BIS.

I get your description, but how should run -> sprint work with this?

I would think steam integration is a planned feature. I'm guessing steamworks will also be included.

I have been testing a bit in the editor and no the lines do no seem to be working as intentional.

I like this idea and I'm voting it up, but I have to say that this kind of realism would probably be more relevant for a team of modders e.g. ACE. I'm not sure BI will go to these lengths in creating a combat simulator.

Though still, voting it up.

@Make Love Not War
Seriously using that nick has me on the troll fence of the whole post. I rest my case.

It doesn't make any sense in my mind. You want to remove a line referring to war in a war simulator with the intent of people not forgetting that real life war i terrible, but you do still want to play the game.

It seems to me like a ethics test for the masses passed by one individual who has a double sided opinion of the subject.

I don't get it. You like playing a war simulator which, if we face it, is about killing other people, but you think it's over the line that the game states "This is War"? I'm not trying to be a dick, I honestly just don't get it.

Having "This is War" is not going to make people disregard or regard the fact that real world war is a terrible thing.

I really, really can't see the terrible thing in writing "This is War" on a war simulator intro. Should it have been "This is Realism" instead? I mean it's still the same game. Killing other people.

I smell a troll. Might even be without intention..

This is very annoying and could easily be fixed in a patch. I have been playing a lot of TvT games where one guy would troll and hold the server inoperable because he refused to ready up.

The explosions are created the same way as they was initialer developed in Arma. This needs to change. It seems almost all the explosions are scaled from the same mushroom cloud based effect.

Frankly it looks bad compared to game effects in games from 2005. And we have seen better use of the engine in creating explosions in mods like warfx and Ace.

The explosions could seriously do with an overhaul. The looks of explosions have been forwarded from OFP -> Arma -> Arma2:OA with incremental additions. I hope there is some way of cranking more/detailed particle effects out of the engine without a massive performance hit.

I especially like the work of: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-mc_zJ58DE

Maybe it can be done in another way than the current way the engine renders particles. I don't know, I haven't got the technical knowledge.

What about implemented different ways of getting over objects. I know this won't fix your idea of jumping over small gaps, but as the game is I see more areas of applications in this idea:

Think of it as this.

• Sprinting towards a waist high fence would enable you to:
  • Vault over quickly and not being able to quickly: aim -> fire

• Running or walking towards a waist high fence would enable you to:
  • Step over slowly and be able to quickly: aim -> fire (As current "v")

This way we maintain animations being bound in use for object that you want to pass, but introduce the "Vault" option for when you need to keep up your sprinting speed and just cross the object as fast as possible.

Can't you use search? Stop writing tickets without searching.

Duplicate

Yes this would be nice.

But.

What is needed is an overhaul of the whole attachment system. There must be some way to create a more modular system. The current working one seems like 1 step in the right direction, but not the full jump needed.

Not sure what you really want from this ticket? I guess category:general fits, but still you should specify more than your current post.

Yes please. The progress from the last HC addition in beta was godsend.

I really hope this idea will be implemented. From what I see in the screenshots posted by NordKindchen it drastically increase the look of current scenarios.

Yes Nord this should be improved.A lot of things are still direct imports from A2, but this is system is "easily" changed for the better, as you have already proved.

I hope to see this idea being accepted as a possibility for the final game.

I hope (And believe they already are)BIS looking into this and the grasstexture concept!

I have seen this bug too, while playing online. Dunno if it can be duplicated.

I cannot think of a reason why this shouldn't be possible for those who are interested.

I vote up.

Just a fast and short animation when disembarking so the game doesn't feel too locked. And having doors as actual objects that you tale cover behind. Maybe make it so that by ejecting the doors would stay open and by selecting "get out" the doors would close afterwards (no player animation for opening or closing doors, just the Quick animation of the player leaving the vehicle.)

I think this is a valid post. A3 is foremost an infantry combat simulator and in my opinion having these magic turning on bearings animations are taking away the immersion.

Well I like the idea, but also comes down to how the missions are create.

Putting all players on a side in one group destroys the use of the ingame von.

I think you have two different understandings of direct communication. One of you thinks it cover actual speech in proximity. The other is of the understanding that direct communication is a low range radio frequency.

As far as I know the flight models aren't final, but put in as a temporary solution.

This is a bug/feature tracker. Please use the search function prior to writing random strains of thought.

I read your link Brian,but I dont get the point you are trying to make. Really thought the physics calculations were done by physx? If not on the gpu then on the cpu.

I guess this fact would enable a great implementation of fastroping instead of the strange "Ladder attached to chopper" solution that was implemented in A2OA.

What do you mean its yet to be enabled? Isn't it what is ingame atm? -nosplash is just a command to remove the splash screen before the engine loads the game.

We have physx now. Should be possible.

I agree that this is something that should be tweaked, but surely BI has started with focus on game stopping issues which starts with errors crashing the game -> Stability and designbugs to make the game playable/better performance (Which splits in to SP and MP) -> visuals and adding content + tweaking of that.

I think as Dagonath and Psychomorph. Especially explosion sounds haven't got the "Oomph" needed to sound like the powerful forces they actually are. Good youtube clip to demonstrate Dagonath.

This will maybe be changed later in the dev process. Otherwise I'm just waiting for ACE. They never let me down!

What about viewing soldiers from a high angle? It would seem strange if a grass mask was rendered starting from a 90 degree angle to the horisontal level and going 90 degree over the soldier. Like grass growing over the soldier, but starting from thin air.

I've failed to reproduce. Need more specifics.

Remember to close if the error is resolved by your software/hardware

Yes I'm tired of looking at the same wounds from (almost) since OFP.

Lol ceeb you've had to write that for quite a few posts now

Might be that the grenade is spawned too far away from the character. Dunno if it will hurt the looks of the throw if it is moved closer.

EDIT: Reproduced and confirmed. Will probably be fixed down the line.

I like the speed as it is. Short high speed sprints are vital for crossing roads or closing other critical distances.

Yes I''ve had that too multiple times. For the moment you can disable the walking animation loop by changing weapon.

Duplicate duplicate. Use search

If you can then close your thread.

You sure the shaking isn't caused by headbob? Try turning down headbob in options.

Yes Gobbo that too. I really hope this was quickly put together so to be able to push out the alpha and not final work.

As Nordkindchen already said, with the amazing work made by former and ongoing modding community a system like this is like teasing with the idea of having a modular approach to weapons and attachements, just to retract the possiblity of it ever working without hackjobs.

@columdrum yes I don't know why they can't pick up from that experience. The way its done atm is looking good, but it seems very cumbersome to modify.

has been fixed. You should be able to close it ; ' )

Marlon908 you are changing your arguments to something completely different. The topic was why there are Faks for stopping bleeding and medics for healing and not just medpacks that heal you.

You ask why there is a separation and not just one pack to rule them all.

As already stated the combat simulation includes medics who has the purpose of treating people. If everyone could pack medpacks there would be no need of a medic, but since the game wants to include this unit in the combat simulation it is they have included the distinction.

Now as you point out, yes shooting someone in the foot enough times kills the person instantly and no this is not real life realistic, but I don't that you can make that point argue that there shouldn't be a medic unit with the functions that are included right now.

It's a bit like saying "this thing is not completely realistic and therefore we shouldn't have this other thing that is partly realistic"

I guess it's about what degree of realism you wan't in a combat simulator.

OT: The way ACE implemented the wound system was very good, while still having room for improvements.

I guess implementing a inaccuracy falloff should be doable. Hope to see it implemented.

Yes this is a bit annoying. I keep looking over my shoulder to see if its a friendly teaming up (Or and enemy!). Hope it can be fixed. Seems to me like the point of where the sound should be played isn't placed directly under the player. Or a variant of that scenario.

This would a great addition to the gameplay.

Personally, I think it's wrong to talk about balancing issues, since Arma is not really about balancing as e.g. Bf3, Cod (Insert multiplayer shooter game name) is.

Moving in with armor should be a serious threat and treated as so. Flanking and positioning with AT weapons is part of the simulation.