By OK you mean when i blow my self up from time to tine?

Sure, it's great!!!

i agree.
The UI in the game in general
and the action menu specificly needs some love.
Nothing has changed about it for 12 years

same for me, Altis is just unplayable. really laggy on MP.
I read somewhere that the DayZ dev team is trying to work on a network bubble.
Why are you not doing the same thing? why my computer need to update what is going on on the other side of Altis?

I am on the dev branch, I don't get 0 FPS, but it's stuttering like hell.
when in Straits everything is fine.

@TOMMEH, Yeah well,
less then a month to release, I don't think they will fix it anymore.
I am disappointed by the state of ArmA 3 until now, I had high hopes, they are gone.

+1

One of those design decisions I never really understood,
Really stupid decision IMO, should be changed to a dedicated key.

ahh, ok I see :)

Real soldiers don't get a crosshair floating in the middle of the air,
so I don't get your point.

IRL I can clearly see where the barrel is, if it's pressed to a wall or not.
In game this is not so easy to see, and in ARMA 2 for example
it often happened that you shoot the wall by mistake,
be it Because the hitboxes are not accurate enough to the actual geometry,
or because you actually view a 3D representation on a flat 2D screen.

This feature is there to show you, your barrel is actually pressed against a wall
since (like I said) is not always easy to see in game as opposed to real life.

Moreover, if you don't like it so much, why do you play with crosshair to begin with?
just turn them off in difficulty settings and go play on servers that have crosshair turned off.

Anyway, its got nothing to do with aimassist,
you still have to aim your shots.

-EDIT-
There is a mod that lower your weapon (like crysis or far cry 3) every time it's pressed against a wall
Personally I think this crosshair moving is the lazy BI solution to this problem.
If they were to implement this method, the crosshair moving wouldn't be necessary, and we will all be happy, I think.

But until then, some sort of indicator to know your barrel is pressed to something, is good to have.
I wouldn't mind of it were togable if it bothers you so much, but not taken out completely.

I understand what you say, I don't care to make this an optional thing in the settings, turn it on or off, cool, I don't mind.

But there is no aiming assist, none, nada nothing.
none what so ever, NO AIMING ASSIST!!!

it's not just with the ghillie suit,
it's the scope issue, even without the ghillie suit.

Anyway duplicate of
http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=11173
and
http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=10179

Thanks guys, will check what you said AD2001,
hope to fix this, it's annoying :(

OK, so my bad, i have two profiles and my keys got mixed up
and i had the "next weapon" key mapped to "change gunner weapon"
for some reason also.

Strangely only the Zafir didn't manage to switch firing modes
all the rest of the weapons worked OK.

Anyway, this can be closed, sorry :|

Ho thats not good.
Someone know what might be the problem?

So, Am I the only one with this problem?

Here is game face working in Fifa 2013
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdG8CDicD7A

From what I heard BF4 will be using gameface also, though I might be wrong.

Yes, it's fairly easy to do, you just need to place an image on the frontal
view and mask it around with some feathering.

The only downside is that the eyes, mouth and nose location of the image
won't be matched to the mesh eyes, mouth and nose locations.
and skin color also won't match to the rest of the head.

However This would not be a problem if they implement the request on ticket 6739
since you could move the mesh eyes, mouth and nose around to match the image,
and set the skin tone to the rest of the head mesh.

All in all it's very possible, and is not such a problem to do.
They just need to be willing to do it.

Regarding face detection, it might be too costly for them, i don't know (though i don't think so),
but that is only to make sure people won't upload unworthy images.
Face detection can be even implemented into Jquery code:
http://davidwalsh.name/face-detection-jquery

Duplicate of 10745

I can't switch to full auto at all last time I used it.

You know, you can toggle permanent free look or use temporary free look.
I use custom keys, so I might be wrong, but I think default is "ALT" and Numpad "*"

If you didn't know that, my guess is you are new around here,
better check the control settings, ArmA have allot of them :)

Haven't tried it yet, but I'll take your word for it.

What I am puzzled by is that they (BI) say that they want to make ArmA 3
the most polished game they made, so more people would find it appealing.
Especially now, after DayZ made ArmA so popular and generally much more well known.

But they fail to realize it's exactly those kind of little things that turn the general
gamer public from ArmA. We the hardcore mili-sim will probably play it regardless,
but if it's true what they say, that they want to make it more polished, than why,
why don't they fix those things that plague this game for years now.
God knows it's not that complicated to add some basic animations and make sure they work properly and smoothly.
even allot of the animations that already in the game are subpar in my opinion for a AAA game.

I am really baffled by it and I hope you step up your game BI.
I say it because I care.

fluxliner, pictures and reality don't look the same.
Pictures are processed, reality isn't.

ArmA try to look like reality not a processed picture.
If you want to know if the lighting is accurate in game to what it is in Greece,
you have to go there not see it in pictures, which are usually processed
so the image look more appealing.

The image is a bit over processed IMO
The game tries to mimic how you see things with your own eyes
not an over processed photo.

If you want to know if it's accurate or not, you have to physically go to Greece
since a photo look nothing like real life when it come to saturation,
contrast, tonal range, Dynamic range etc.

Personally I think the lighting is not bad at all.
Although I am not from Greece, i am not so far away and I live in a similar
weather country.

Moreover, I think there are other things the devs should work on,
and not color saturation contrast and so on.

OK, so I won't vote down, but I won't vote up either.

Saying the sea is too small is not an excuse really.
Extending the sea is a job of a few minutes and it's not gonna be
expensive to have the sea stretch to another even ho 50 miles.

All they need to add is a carrier (they already have the model from ArmA 2)
maybe one battle cruiser and a submarine.
That alone would be enough to make some very nice naval combat.

Upvoted!

+1
That would be nice, I avoid allot of servers for that reason exactly.

deployable grenade like camera,
yeah I know, stupid marketing video,
but again this is also already in active service for some time now:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0SF1jIjFJo

Viper robot, in active service for some time now:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEX3Ci2nIrU

Or the ODF eyeDrive robot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPLBVgQxMGg

About sniper detection systems, the acoustic ones are older, new ones are actually
optical based.

Here is a small cover of some of them in a forum i read sometimes,
sorry it's google translated, but it's reasonable I think.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://www.fresh.co.il/vBulletin/showthread.php?t=526118

-Armor-
I don't know much about this liquid armor, but I think the Opfor soldiers have too good armor
already, and it's not like it's heavy or something.

-Thermals-
When I said it's not convenient to walk with thermals I didn't mean due to it's size.

Thermal vision is a very unclear image of reality, you see all by it's thermal signature
which most of the time is almost the same color shade.

Actually maneuvering over the terrain with thermal view is not ideal, since
it would be very hard to see what you are stepping on and so on,
even if the goggles would be the size of reading glasses.
That is why I don't see the need for goggles, scopes mounted on the gun itself is enough IMO.
But hey, I wouldn't downvote it, no worry :) I don't mind if it's there really.

-HUD-
There are already tactical glasses, You open the GPS and see it on the screen all the time as
a HUD element, you can place markers on the map and see them as waypoints, you see your squad
members with hexagons, again it's pretty much all there.

Ok, whatever, you got my vote +1
just no armor improvements!!!

-EDIT-
and BTW, again I will say, acoustic sniper detection systems are not new at all
and being used daily, at least here in Israel.

I will throw some more ideas your way of things already in use today
that can actually be cool for gameplay and IMO wouldn't be stupid or too futuristic.

1 - Liquid armor, OPFOR already can take allot of dammage, let's just say they have liquid armor

    or whatever else armor would be in the furture, I don't see the need to make even a better body 
    armor than what they have now.

2 - Acoustic Sniper detection systems, +1 for that, they are nothing new really.

    they are being used for some years now, it would be nice to have them in game actually.

3 - Interactive HUD, well, In a way, we can say we already have that, you do have a HUD

    and depending on your difficulty settings you have all sorts of elements on it,
    so it's kind of there already.

4 - Thermal Vision Scopes sights will be probably in the game, don't see the need for Thermal Goggles.

Even if they are common by 2035, it's not really something you can walk with, so scopes is enough IMO.

Don't be hard on yourself dude, the idea is nice, and you know,
maybe you are right, maybe I wish ArmA 3 would have take place in 2013,
and that's why I have a problem with Exo Suits,
I don't know, it just feels to me not in place in ArmA, don't take it personally.

Though I do believe Exo Suits won't be at the battlefield by 2035,
none of us really have a way of knowing, so we might be wrong.

Either way, the BigDog as a support unit, with that i could live.

You guys really think that in 2035 exo suits would be a common thing in the battlefield? I don't think so. it would probably take a bit longer.
downvoted.

Well i suggest you edit the text since
it sounds like you know people who
can do it IRL and would like to be
able do it ingame also.

LOL, you said it AD2001.

Raul, they can leave the glare if it's in a realistic angle,
but read my ticket 0009919, look at the screenshot and you will
see that it is NOT realistic the way it is now.

Anyway maeel, I did not downvote this ticket,
just sharing what I know.

Best of luck.

OK, like I said I don't know what is going on in other armies
all I know that here it's pretty much not in use since the early/mid 90's.
maybe even late 80's, but thats before my time so I wouldn't know really.

I am not familiar with AC58 or APAV40, But the Simon is mainly
used for door breaching from a distance, not as a grenade launcher.

However, while I do agree a dedicated GL like the Milkor MGL would be nice,
As far as I know (at least here in the IDF) Rifle Grenades are not
used anymore and have been replaced entirely with the likes of M203GL,
Apart from using the Simon for breaching of course, like I said before.

These Rifle Grenades are old and not as reliable as normal GL, are much more
dangerous to use, and as far as I know (at least here) are out of service
for many years now.

On any case, I would like to know what advantage would you get by using
a Rifle grenade over a regular GL, apart from having soldiers without GL
be able to fire grenades to a distance?

I really don't remember,
but OPF took place in the 80's no? cold war and all...
in the 80's it was still used often.

I agree with you it's annoying.

Just so you know for the mean time, until it's fixed (if it's ever)
while you look in the optics and you want to lock on a target,
press the Sec. mouse button and hold!

It will lock but won't exit the optics mode.

Anyway, upvoted.

OMG, this ticket did not show up when I searched,
this is not the first time it happens to me with the search here.

Sorry MadDogX, I did search :(

A question offtopic if I may tarciop,
How do you make a clickable link here without all the URL address showed?

The rearm function rearm you with your last saved loadout.
So if you make a custom loadout save it and then rearm it will not add
any extra equipment, at least in MP and in my experience.

It could be different in SP since you don't have the ability to save loadouts (vanila SP that is)
in SP as far as I know (though I hardly play SP) it just rearm you with your unit standard loadout.

Regarding emptying the whole inventory in one click, it would be nice to have a
button in the UI "remove all", but it should not replace the "ALT+right click" idea
of this thread.

OK true, doesn't change the fact that you fill your entire
inventory in one second... that's the point really.

If it's what you want or need, is a different issue altogether.

@KardasLT your point would be valid IF the rearm option would not be there.
Now the rearm feature magically fills my ammunition in one second,
So your point is not valid IMO.

Also, like other people said, it's got nothing to do with realism.

I didn't go into specifics, I agree it shouldn't be the right click.
But the idea itself of the ability to do so, is what I vote up

-EDIT-
@b101uk, your idea is solid with the ALT key as a modifier,
however I can see the issue arise from it since different people have different key bindings,
so it could be solved by having this modifier key bindable in the options, problem solved!

@nib_77, I suggest that you edit the ticket since I do agree
with b101uk, that using the right click is problematic.

+1
it's very annoying to click 15 times to remove just your magazines for example.
Should be easily fixed also.

Well, as much as I'd wish BI would have make a completely new engine for ArmA 3,
(when they announced Physx, I thought they did) after playing the Alpha it
was clear to me it's the same engine with some patches on top of it.

Making what you are asking for might require a brand new engine,
or a complete rewrite of the engine from the ground up.
No one says it's not possible, but yes, it would take time.

Unfortunately, business have time schedules to stand by, they probably
made promises to steam, and probably many other companies and they have
to deliver the game by a said time frame, they can not do whatever they feel like,
face it that is how businesses works.
If they would do what ever they feel like, no other company would want to work with them.

It's not that they can just say now, "well lets do everything from scratch"
time and money is a good reason to state why it's not gonna happen now.

To say I am not disappointed it's not a brand new engine? of course I am,
but what can we do about it now? not much.

Let's hope ArmA 4 would be all that we hoped for!

Well all that is really needed to make it better
is some debris flying around and more particles.

and when the building itself collapse,
to make a better animation than what is have now,
THAT'S IT!

Even the example I did is too much time and effort.

it can all be particle effects,
even the big chunks of debris can be particles, which will disappear over time.

Thats should be possible to do very quickly.
will try do to some example when I have the time.

To be honest, I don't think using APEX is possible atm also.
But like I said, improving the destruction animation would be nice.
If they use something like Physx or not to do it, I don't really care.

But using APEX for real time destruction, it's not gonna happen.
That's what I think.

Well I don't have it also, it's at an office I work at sometimes.

But you can use blender BTW to these kind of things
and blender also have very good fluid dynamics for smoke and so on
which max can only do with external plugins

And Blender is FREE!

3DS MAX with rayfire tool, it uses Physx.

Yeah it has no dust and particles at all,
which will hide most of the clipping issues and so on.

Also, since this is rendered to a 2D video, it's much harder to make,
if it was real 3D, it would have been much much easier to make more modular.

Here is something with some dust:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/34313938/ArmA3%20screenshots/PhysxTest/building_test_01.html

Again I did it just for fun, and this is very basic,
but I think it illustrate that even if a tank hit
a little bit to the side, it can still look nice.

Well because I enjoy doing these stuff and I learn it also
I did what you can call "proof of concept" for predefined destruction animation
Just hover your mouse around and click.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/34313938/ArmA3%20screenshots/PhysxTest/building_test_02.html

You know just for fun...

Sure I want building to collapse as well.
Even in BFBC2 it's all canned animations.
no real time physics there either.

@plutoto74

Well, Let's say I am sure it's not possible as much as you are sure it is ;)

At least we can all agree
that the building demolition should improve (one way or the other)
and that we all care about the game and want it to be in it's best,
otherwise we wouldn't discuss it here.

I really think that all is needed is better animations.
I really do believe it can look very good if done properly (for sure better than what we have now)
Again, look at BF3, it's all predefined animations and it does not look weird in any way.

Raul we do understand,
but what you guys don't understand is that even if it is possible (and I stress IF)
it's not gonna happen, the game is too further in development to make
such a drastic change to maps the size of Altis.

Even so, I highly doubt this is possible with the ArmA engine anyway.

Even baked animations would be expensive to compute
why do you think the building just falls to the ground
you see some dust and then a destroyed model is just there?

Because it's too damn expensive to compute.

You think I don't want it to look better than it is now?
but let's be realistic here and try to think about solutions
the DEVS can actually work with and not just I WANT PHYSX I WANT I WANT...

indeed impressive, but like I said

1. ArmA Physx integration is not as nearly as good as this.
2. This demo have no AI.
3. The map is smaller than the airport in Stratis.
4. There are no other players (meaning not multiplayer with 60 players)
5. There are no vehicles.
6. There is no vegetation and terrain.
7. It's only the facade that get's blown up, at the end the building stays up.
8. And IMO, the demolition is not very realistic (impressive yes), but it feels very arcade like.

Don't get me wrong, it's impressive, but no one up until now
showed something like that in a real game environment, let alone a game like ArmA.

OK, let's say for argument sake it's possible and I am wrong.
I still hope they won't do it, because let's face it, ArmA Physx integration sucks big time,

Look at the most simple of collisions, a car and a create for example,
it has clipping issues, unrealistic values, jumping around, or not moving at all
looks nothing like physics if you get what I mean.

Now take that and multiply it 100 folds to a collapsing building.
How do you think it would look? not like what you want it to look I am pretty sure.

So I still think Baked animation is a good solution,
and done smartly it can look great!

Of course it's less natural than real time physx
but it's MILES better than what you have now.
And face it, real time is too demanding.

Also look at the quality of ArmA real time Physx,
it's pretty much crap if you ask me, collision issues etc.
Why do you think this would be any better?

And, FYI all these Physx destructions are very arcade like
they are not realistic at all, they are cool for gameplay, sure,
but not realistic.

The advantage of baked animation is, they can tweak it as much as needed
to make it look realistic enough, even if you hit a few meters to the side
of the initial impact animation.

Also, like I said, does BF3 destruction look so bad?
IMO it's pretty good, and news flash, it's predefined animation!

EDIT
you didn't read what I said,
It's easy to make an animation for each side of the building.

@plutoto74 "You would say LESS more naturally after resource-eating it's another prob"
Sorry, but What? can you explain what you said just now, I don't get it, sorry :)

Using this for real time is just not feasible for a game like ArmA.
The better solution is to use Physx to bake the animation.

They can make 4 animations, each for each side of the building
depending where it was hit from and then bake the animation.
It would still look cool, better than what we have now for sure
and very much possible, I think everybody will be happy.

If the ticket would edit the suggestion to something like that,
I will upvote, but not real time demolition, just no.

Also FYI, even BF3 demolition is baked animation,
and it still looks good.

I don't think even GPU acceleration would be enough
for the map sizes of arma to have all buildings using real time Physx demolition.

Don't get me wrong there is nothing I would want more
and I would love to be proven wrong (maybe GPU acceleration can work I don't know)
but lets be realistic, it's not your typical corridor shooter with a small map.

They could use it to bake the animation, it would look so much better
and can be done with out any significant performance lost in my opinion.

They can use APEX to make the animation and then bake it to the game.
but not using it real time in the game.

Look at the demo you posted it has ONE building, thats all.
ArmA have cities upon cities full with buildings,
AI, multiplayr code, vehicles volumetric clouds, etc etc.
what you are asking is just not valid for real time.

Also ArmA Phsyx sucks, don't think it will look like your demo
even if they would use it.

Anyway like I said I agree that the animations should improve dramaticly
if they use APEX or not to do it, it's up to them.

But using real time in the game is too much.

I am sure there are.
But do these games have 270 square kilometrs maps
with hounreds of building, houndreds of AI all iniside a multiplyer map?
do their ghame engines are 12 yeras old with patch upon a patch?
do their Physx are as "good" as Arma's Physx?

I find it hard to believe.

It's alwyas nice to see demos like that.
but look around you, there are no AI and the map is totaly empty.
there is only one building in the middle and a simple skybox.
Now compare that to ArmA...

Don't be fooled,
even BF3 uses predefined animations to thier building destruction.

I agree the animation could use ALLOT of work, but using Physix
for all the buildings in ArmA is just asking too much.

I will upvote "improve building destruction animation"
but sorry not this, downvoting.

By OK you mean when i blow my self up from time to tine?

Sure, it's great!!!

i agree.
The UI in the game in general
and the action menu specificly needs some love.
Nothing has changed about it for 12 years

Zafir for some reason lost it's full auto capability.
at least now that I tried it at the editor.

I agree with everything here except the zoom function,
which as far as I remember Bino don't have zoom anyway,
so b101uk fears can go to rest.

anyway, upvoted.

I can confirm that.

-EDIT-
A way to avoid this is to not put the rebreather in the backpack directly from the ground,
but to wear it first and then move it to the back pack.

Should still be fixed of course, just thought to mention it.
and bump the ticket up ;)

The hold breath and zoom in is already seperated but that is not the problem
like CXN2615 tickets suggets.

I will try to explain it more clearly.

Sure I can map those two functions to two different keys,
but unlike COD or BF, ARMA have many more buttons that are already
occuping most of my keyboard, and I would like to streamline the
controls as much as possible.

If I will have only hold breath to Sec. mouse button
I will need to use some other key to zoom which is not convinient since most
of my keys around my movment kyes (i use the arrow keys) alreay have other functions mapped.

If I will use Sec. mouse button only to zoom I will need to map
hold breath to some other key which will also be not convinient from the same reason.

The solution is very easy. hold breath should be activated only while looking through
sights (any sights for that matter) and only while standing still.

It should NOT activate while moving and looking through sights
It should NOT activate while standing and NOT looking through sights

ONLY while looking through sights/Bino while standing still!

This solution will not harm any other player (to all the people who downvoated CXN2615 ticket)
in fact it will do them only good also.

That is why I think this ticket is not important/I downvoted it.
since CXN2615 ticket already have a solution, people just need to upvoate it.

Sorry SuicideKing.

SuicideKing I wrote you on the other post the same thing.
You seem not to agree, but take it from an ex infantry soldier
when I tell you, you are dead wrong on not holding breath with
non zoom sights.

Remove the not breathing while moving, sure I get that.
But it is common place to hold breath also with non zoom sights
like iron sights and red dot and whatnot.

BTW, with binuculars it can be also usfull to hold breath
sometimes.

downvoated.

@vagrantauthor you took the words out of my mouth.

Also they are not elastic at all. they might hop a bit, but I think it's done
fairly well already, and dose not require any more work from BI.

Yes +1
Of course they should make sure they keep it in realistic levels an not over do it'
but now i often cant see where i hit at all.
Although in reality it can sometimes also be hard to see where you hit.
The game is justt not consistent with it.

Thanks ShotgunSheamuS, Well, I rather enjoy this LOL.
I also hope the DEVS consider this.

It would really help mission makers and it would go well with the
Economy base building module (or how ever it's called) from ArmA 2.
If (or when) they will add it.

thank you dude :) my pleasure!
I am actually thinking of a nicer design, something that would also look nice
not just functional.

Sure np, you mean something like this?
Of course the design can change, as to where the stairs and ramp would be
how it would look etc, did it very quickly just to show the idea.

+1 I am sick of hovering buildings!

This have an easy solution and a realistic one.
All building have support pillars that run into the ground,
all that is needed is a simple box model that would continue
under the building models that will illustrate those support pillars.

No need to manipulate terrain or any other feature.

Example added to show with and without a simple box model under the building.

Yeah i know, it was just a figure of speech you know...

We are not talking about textures or models here that are self made art assets.
We are talking about bug fixes, made entirely in the engine of the game.

If you are referring to the thermal imaging yes it might come from VBS.
but like I said, IF I remember correctly (I could be wrong here I admit)
there are some things in the ArmA series that started as mods.
I will have to search a bit, since I don't remember ATM.

However, if a project like the ticket suggest would happen,
Any modder that will send his bug fix (related to a ticket from here)
would need to tick a disclaimer check box stating he understand he can not ask for any royalty etc etc
and BI have the full rights over his mod/fix. He will get a credit at the game though.

This should solve this issue in any case,
and I am sure most modders would be honored to have a place
in the credit section and will be happy to help.

Anyway, if BI don't like the idea, OK whatever,
but I don't think it's a reason to downvote this ticket.

You could very much be right.
But every vote counts :)

NP riise,

I really think it a great idea and truly don't understand
who on his right mind would downvote this :/

The excuse of using third party mods is so weak IMHO,
look at ArmA 2 Operation arrowhead, if I remember correctly
many of the new features introduced there, started as mods by the community.

Hope your idea get implemented!

-EDIT-
@Rewan, BTW, the issue with royalties is a non issue really,
since BI hold all rights for the game, and modders in fact have permission from BI
to make mods by using and changing game content.
No modder will ever be able to ask for royalties from BI,
exactly the same way no modder can sell his work for money.

@Dr_Death, And who is smookie? they hired him based on his animation mods.

I think people who downvote this ticket are not only hindering a process
that could potentially make the game better, more stable and do all this faster,
but also are quick to forget that this game was built over the years
not just by BI but also by the community.

And here, only two examples of things BI still haven't fixed
that have been done by mods:

Fixes the inability to switch weapons while moving, by Sniperwolf572:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wouoN9e9fM4#at=11

Fixes the movement stops while changing stances, by Igitur:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=J50dwHvniFU

think about how faster this game would progress
if an idea like this would be implemented.

And let's not forget that

• We, the community, mod this game because we have permission from BI to do so.
• Nobody will force the modders to give their mods, it will by choice.
• Most likely most modders will be happy to contribute and probably will get credits in the game.
• BI can choose which mods will fit their needs, if it's not good, it's not in, if it is, why fix it from scratch?
• It's a potential recruitment pipeline for BI.

I think it's a FANTASTIC idea and people should vote this up.
If you vote this down it's like shooting yourself in the leg really.

This is a great idea!
Sure BI would need to take these bug fixing mods and add
them to a patch and it would take time.

But it would take much less time than doing it from scratch.

Only today i saw a mod at armaholic that fixes all the stance movement
animation issues that make you stop for a sec.
The mod fixes those completly. as far as i know BI is still
working on it (if they work on it at all). it would save them allot of time to just take this mod,
If the maker grants it of course.

Sure mabe some mods wont fit or are too poorly coded,
but it can help allot and to be honest i have no idea why BI
didn't do something like that already.

@ceeeb you are right, you can't throw, but you can drop it, or place it.

Regarding explosives, you are very right,
but in reality I can infact drop a grenade or any other thing under water.
Why should I do it? I don't know, but I can.

Well technically speaking
nothing in real life would stop from throwing a grenade under water also.
If you are crazy enough.

Anyway definite +1

It would be nice to know why people downvote.
write something if you do please.

thanks.

OK, there is a ticket for a clacker already which solve exploding the
charge accidentally and solve some other issues as well.

This ticket is mainly to solve the problem of placing an explosive accidentally.

Though I don't see the problem of people running around with a satchel (also realistically speaking)
I understand what you mean.

Do you have another solution than?

Regarding realism, what you said is true, but not always.
it is left in a backpack until you reach the target but how far from the target?
I personally remember from my advanced training my CO had to breach a barbed wire using
a Bangalore so our squad can carry on.

The barbed wire was exposed to enemy fire and making all the preparations there
would have been dangerous, he prepped the bangalor prior to proceeding to the barbed wire,
and actually walked with it in hand for about 100 meters by himself.

Of course some steps he did not do because of safety protocols but trying to take the
device out of the backpack in an exposed area would take valuable time that you can
potentially be under fire.

Like I said I understand you would not like the visual aspect of people walking
with explosives in hand, but it can be realistic sometimes. just so you know.

Wow you downvoted it because it would look like CS?
So you don't care to get blown up by mistake as long
as it would not remind you CS? OK, your call.

And what do you think happen in real life dear sir?
the explosive magically appear in their hands and they place it on the ground?

if I want to walk with the stachel in my hands I might have a good reason
to so, downvoting it because it reminds you of CS is really a lame excuse
in my opinion, but each his own I guess

Lets downvote iron sights also, it reminds me of BF.

Ok I didn't know only a specialist can disarm explosives
which lead to the added feature that should be implemented: Arming.

At the moment placing an explosive on the ground is as good as arming it.
it shouldn't be this way.

Edited the additional information to make my suggested usage more clear.

Beta (Development) 0.71.106998

Still present in the dev build for me.

I can confirm that I also have issues with that.
A light loaded soldier will breath heavily for me after
just a few meters of jogging or tactical pace walking.

I wrote it in some other ticket that to me it really feels
like the ArmA 3 soldiers are a bunch of pu**ies.

Fix it please!

just happened to me yesterday, I like this new MG
it was so disappointing not to be able to use it :(

Reminds me of the negev a little bit, and the name also sounds Israeli.

-EDIT-
Confirmed based on the new NG7 7.62 Negev LMG
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-va3P63S_0
by the looks of it, the recoil should be reduced in game.

Are you sure they are not dead and just look like they are alive?
try to shoot the driver and then go in as a driver,
if he is dead you should be able to, and his body will drop out of the vehicle.

I am not a demolition specialist but, Most military grade explosives are stable
enough and will not explode if fired upon. You probably need extreme heat or an
electrical spark to make it explode.

A few bullet impacts should not cause an explosion as far as I know.
unless by some fluke of luck the bullet caused some spark, or it is
a very highly unstable explosive.

Like I said I am not expert on this, but it seems logical to me.

Today I witnessed something even stranger,
I don't know if it's because it's domination and it could be that the AI are moded, but...

I spotted a patrol of 4 enemies walking in a "safe" movement from about 300 meters.
I started to shoot at them but my first 3 shots only impacted the ground next to their feet,
even so, they didn't seem to care or even notice they are being shot at, and continued to look "safe".
To make things worse I didn't use a silencer.

But, the second I hit someone, they were alerted and manage to spot my location with in seconds.

And to say it's communication is just wrong in my opinion, because it's clear that even if you kill
someone silently with one bullet to the head and no one saw it, they are still alerted.
What now? people will say they have heart beat sensors alarms on every soldier in the group?

-EDIT-
This game have allot of things that need to be fixed, but I am sure most people will understand
that a game at this magnitude is bound to have issues.
However I think the AI is one of the biggest issues, it just does not feel natural or humane in any way.

They are either,
very very dumb (the night showcase on regular was a joke imho,
they fired at me from 30 meters full clips but did not hit me at all)
OR
they are super AI, aimbots that can pinpoint your location from 1000 meters and shoot at you before they even turn around, all knowing all seeing with super fast reflexes and super body armor.

This is really frustrating and it breaks the game, and it's a real shame.