Actually, IMO, the main problem is that the context menu works as a dynamic instance - it constantly shifts around, adding and removing options as they are detected as viable.

I think a more static version would be more precise. Consider the static menu of SWAT4 - you point at an object, right-click and a context menu tailored for a specific situation pops up.

What could work in ARMA3 is that the context menu should be generated once on-demand. For example, you point at the helicopter door, press the context menu button (middle mouse button, for example) and a static list is generated, valid for that given situation.

Also, the above proposition isn't anything groundbreaking, it already exists both in Arma 2 and 3 - for opening doors, mounting vehicles, etc - your context action is displayed as an icon. Incorporate the rest of actions into the same solution and you would only have to generate a very short list of 2-3 available commands (open/close door & board/exit).

It works very similarly in Take On Helicopter.

BIS guys and gals, it's time to do away with the old prehistoric context menu which requires you to scroll and re-scroll through hundreds of options. You have cleaned that up greatly in Arma 3, but I think the way forward is a more focused on-demand action menu.

This is a really good idea and would greatly improve gameplay for low-spec machines which do not generate as lavish terrain over longer ranges (lower graphic settings).

It seems to be alright in the latest development build. I cannot reproduce the error.

It seems that the AI is using predefined paths to navigate the buildings right now, because when they finally enter it they mostly go to their preselected spot exactly the same way.

@SGTTce: the only mods I am aware of for Arma 2 is for automatic building filling. There is also a script that just assigns different positions for units inside a building.

That is everything I am aware of.

Rotor blades are the most delicate component of any helicopter. If you waltz into a small tree with your cabin then you shouldn't suffer too much damage. But if you hit a wall with your rotor blade, you're toast. But since Arma3 vehicle damage is based on HP's (which is lame in itself, but that's a different problem) it might be difficult to do.

However, I still say do it right: if there's no skill involved in low level ground hugging (which is kinda essential for piloting any attack/recon chopper) then it just isn't challenging and fun.

So make up your bloody mind - on one hand ppl go nuts over things like "omg we are running too fast!" but still want to bounce of buildings and trees in their choppaz.

My point is, since SDAR should (haven't tested this) shoot out of the water, whether bullets should have some sort of water penetration is a question of gameplay. If bullets cannot penetrate water at all, but SDAR can kill targets by shooting from underwater, then it creates imbalance, since a diver can kill a soldier on the shore, but not the other way around.

Considering that we have a SDAR which shoots underwater, is a discussion on realism actually relevant here?

I remember that people wanted such feature in the original Operation Flashpoint, back when the engine allowed only for 1 firing position per vehicle (Blackhawks had only 1 MG and were defenseless from the left side).

So I wholeheartedly second and triple this. Firing from a chopper should come with some penalties, so you couldn't snipe from a chopper a mile away, but it definitely needs an appearance.

@JohnCage
Don't be an idiot, developing a game takes time. Also read sitreps: focus now is on stability issues which come first.

@Icchan: please compare how camera lenses show depth of field, especially with low focal ratios. It is very unlike how the human eye sees it. The DoF effects in games are overdone on purpose to provide a very cinematic effect.

Personally, I detest both motion blur and depth of field effects.

I have no idea what motion blur is supposed to do actually. It is funny in an arcade racing game to add to the impression of speed, but being an amateur racing driver I can tell you that stuff doesn't get automatically blurry at 120mph. At all.

Depth of field in turn is a lousy attempt at replicating a cinematic/photographuc effect in order to hide your low tex/poly butt ugly backdrops. This is good for consoles which are inferior in terms of processing power, so they need to hide their ugly bits more.

Arma 3 is a PC game.

I do understand that this is a matter of personal preference, hence I am all for giving the player a choice.

Also, remember that this is a computer game and should be treated as such. There is a whole lot of abstraction in the gameplay, as well as shortcuts meant to increase the "fun factor" without dragging the player into tedious tasks. Therefore any discussion on the actual "realism" of having female soldiers in the game is moot - if we go that direction, why not talk about realistic engine repairs, full controls for all firearm mechanisms along with firing procedures... and a mandatory 2 week bootcamp campaign so people behave like actual soldiers in multiplayer servers.

I say give the players the choice: pro "manly men's army" people can always create or participate in missions without female models. On the other hand, there is a sizable number of women who would want to play the game and may (or not) care about whether they play as women. Again, there is a choice.

Also, remember that this is a computer game and should be treated as such. There is a whole lot of abstraction in the gameplay, as well as shortcuts meant to increase the "fun factor" without dragging the player into tedious tasks. Therefore any discussion on the actual "realism" of having female soldiers in the game is moot - if we go that direction, why not talk about realistic engine repairs, full controls for all firearm mechanisms along with firing procedures... and a mandatory 2 week bootcamp campaign so people behave like actual soldiers in multiplayer servers.

I say give the players the choice: pro "manly men's army" people can always create or participate in missions without female models. On the other hand, there is a sizable number of women who would want to play the game and may (or not) care about whether they play as women. Again, there is a choice.

This is a great idea, precision spawning would also greatly help in creating scripted events/cutscenes.