Oh god I have that too and it's so fucking annoying. Afaik it's since 1.22.

Plus, I experienced in some vehicles (the ones with greenish thermal imaging, the ones with black/white seem to be ok) there is something majorly broken with the brightness or contrast?
Because the thermal imaging is so damn bright, I see nothing but green, no chance to see a bit of the landscape and even the hot targets which naturally appear in lighter green are hard to spot because the whole imagine is so bright.

(I changed absolutely nothing with my graphic settings, all this appeared with 1.22.)

Note: I need to test if changing the HDR thingy is working for me, too. Hopefully it does.

"Highest RoF in the game have the Wipeout Gatling and the small caliber Gatlings. These have a RoF of about 70 RPS. So these should have the highest possible RoF in Arma 3. All the other Autocannons/Gatlings then should have their real life RoF - calcuated down so it fits to the Arma 3.
(Like setting 70 RPS in RL and 30 RPS in Arma 3 to 100% and then calcuate down)."

Not to be mistaken:
The Gatlings with the highest RoF in reality which are present in the game are the Wipeout Gatling and the small caliber Gatlings.
The real life RoF is for both about 70 RPS. So, as said, set those real life 70 RPS to 30 RPS in game and to 100% and then calcuate the other guns with that system.

Here is a better example for "Climbing a hill":

http://youtu.be/cpCXtgoLU-s?t=10s

Notice how the truck is shifting down a gear at 0:17 and 0:24 and the rev/min are increasing in the process, of course. That's what the gear box in Arma 3 should do, too.
Another good example at 3:20.

Jep, that's exactly the issue. No idea who voted it down. I hear many people on the servers complaining about it.

It's no usual lag or desync, it's some issue of the game, because when in close range (e.g 300m) everything is working fine and smooth. But the further things are away, the worse it gets.

@ cyckuan:

I have no idea about all those things, but hopefully that will help to get this issue fixed, because it's one of the most annoying ones regarding multiplayer.

In fact, it's happening so regularily and is so disturbing for the whole gaming experience it's more or less making far away tank battles impossible. So right now I'd rather play on a server with a fixed object distance of 1500m and view distance of 2000m even though being surrounded by a fog jacket then.

Okay, it seems it got worse since the last 2 patches. I also could see it now happening to non-player controlled soldiers and vehicles.

Getting killed inside the cockpit of the A-10 by small arms should be impossible. That needs to be fixed.
The cockpit is armored with a half-ton tub made out of titan and is resistant up to 23mm. Couldn't find any info on the canopy, but I'm sure it's equiped with glass strong enough to protect against at least small arms fire.

Uhm that was a reply to Necrodancer who said he could penetrate the cockpit with a Katiba 6.5mm.
He deleted his comment for some reason, so my answer looks now a little wierd.

So I meant the A-10 should be protected against anything up to .50cal (if it's not already). But of course not against 30mm.

@Chomp:

If that's true, that would be pretty sad. It's the Devs job to investigate the mistakes they made.

At least one of them is always reproducible, the last one.

I know, depends on the caliber again, but yea. The weapon effects I explained were meant to be the ones in Arma 3, not RL. As I said, in RL those rockets would mess a chopper up.

And yes, this should get tweaked. I hit a Ghosthawk with a 125mm HE shell from the T100 tank gun (1.14 stable branch) and nothing happened.

Most (if not all) of the vehicles are already available in real life anyway. Some are just newer and less known vehicles. So there should be plenty of data available, so there is pretty much no need for speculation.

While imho many of the aircrafts aro too vulnerable to small arms and .50 cal, many of them can take too much damage from large caliber and missiles as our reports prove.
But it used to be way worse when the game was released, it just needs a little more tweaking.

[In 1.00 any chopper could take several hits from AP/HE 120mm tank gun shells and ridiculous amounts of any kind of 30/40mm autocannon fire.]

@IceBreakr:

Latest version or somewhat earlier? Choppers were extremely resistant to everything but AA missiles when the game was released (e.g. 120mm tank gun). But this is fixed.

And still. HE =/= HEAT.
Or do you mean with "HE head"?
Anyway, I guess you took the RPG HE rockets. These are pretty weak against any kind of armor. Take the usual RPG rockets against any kind of vehicle. The HE are against infantry.
Sure, in RL also HE rockers would mess such a chopper up. But these discrepancies are there because of the "health system". Same issue with the rocket launchers against tanks. These rockets should not be able to completely destroy a modern MBT at all - yet they can, due to the health system.

But I see some very good improvements in the latest Dev versions regarding vehicle armor. Can't wait for these changes coming into the stable branch!

@DarkSideSixOfficial:

You can't just implement real life parameters in Arma 3. In real life, gun fire can be heard several kilometers away and e.g. the air-to-air missiles AMRAAM have a range of up to 120 kilometers. 155mm Artillery up to 70 kilometers, etc.

Ok I think I found out what is going wrong and why people come to different braking distances. Modern cars need about 40 m for emergency braking at 100 km/h.

Offroad:
100 - 0 km/h using only "backward" -> 60 m
100 - 0 km/h using "backward" + handbrake -> ~ 40 m

Same issue with the Hatchback. Only vehicles tested so far. The just "backward" brakes with the Hatchback are alright, together with handbrake the braking distance is even a bit short.
It seems that using only backward is not activating the rear brakes or at least not as effective as the handbrake. That's a bug and the cause of it all. And of course it's not realistic, as the rear brakes are at their maximum performance when stomping the pedal (maybe limited by the ABS).

jep this is an important issue. especially because it's not realistic as well. all vehicles have in real life enough power to climb hills way faster than they do in the game.
note the RPM are quite low when driving onto some hill. there is a simple map-mod which uses "hill climb gear", forcing the vehicle to stay into a lower gear. even it's very simple and the vehicle bounce a little, it feels quite realistic.
so please get this fixed.

the opposite on downhill parts. you can't drive like 130 km/h downhill with an APC. at least not in drive-mode/with closed clutch as it would overspin the engine even in the highest gear. so please add a limiter near the real max. speed of those vehicles.

I don't think it's limited to 1 km .. ? It may be limited, but I locked on targets and killed them further away than 1 km.

Anyway, exact real life parameters are impossible (as someone asked for that). E.g. AMRAAM has a range of up to 120 km in real life.

Agreed! And the volume is fading much too soon!

Of course, it's not reasonable to set it to actual real life parameters. But the distance needs to be at least doubled in all cases and the fading needs a major reduction, too. Would give the game a better warfare-like atmosphere.
And more forceful ambient battle-sounds would be great.

Watch some real conflict videos somewhere on the internet and listen to the (scary) noise of real firefights. Arma needs to get closer to that.

But as said of course no real life parameters as real gunfire is audible over several kilometers. Same with range and lock-on-range of tanks/jets etc. as in real life tanks can engage targets that are 6 km away and jets targets that are 180 km away! ("AMRAAM 120D")

Just made some further testing with autocannons.
Seems that 30mm/40mm AP easily penetrates a whole house (2-3 walls) and destroys a car behind that house with a few rounds.
That and the concept of destructible buildings is awesome and give the game really a much more realistic feeling.

Now the APCs just need a bigger ammo capacity. Those 40 + 60 rounds of the 40mm are gone in no time :D
I read most of the APCs with 20-40mm autocannons can carry up to 1000+ rounds (the crew needs to rearm the ammo belts though after a certain number of rounds)

Referring to the youtube video and self-testings, penetration is still badly messed up.
Penetration is a very important issue, especially in urban-area clashes.
Arma has always been and is still not a realistic war sim to the point, you only shoot at sight and then most likely kill the other player with a high accurancy.
In real firefights, soldiers often just fire in the direction of a enemy hideout, hoping to hit something or at least supress enemy backfire.
Firefights like these are way more intense and would be more fun in a game.

So in an urban area or when attacking a hideout, it would be realistic and fun just to fire towards the enemy, hoping to penetrate the objects he is hiding behind.
And well, in fact, bullet penetration is way higher in reality than it is in Arma 3 right now.

• All large caliber cannons (20mm, 30mm, 40mm; with piercing ammo) must be able to penetrate almost every usual object and in many cases even twice. For example almost every kind of brick or concrete wall, trees, cars etc. etc. (just tested a 40mm cannon on a thin wall once, it did penetrate which is good. hope it's the same with other objects)

• 7,62mm and .50 cal.: The .50 cal. e.g. in snipers is made to penetrate even light armored vehicles in reality. So it should at least penetrate simple brick walls and thin concrete made objects which it can't right now.

7.62mm machine guns and assault rifles can penetrate simple walls, too. At least after a few rounds. You wouldn't be safe in one of those old houses in Arma 3 if it were real and so you shouldn't be in the game. (same for cars!)

• 5,56mm and 6,5mm: Almost no penetration power in the game. These kind of bullets still have some good penetratiom power in real life and so should have in the game. Both should be able to go right through a car door, one occupant and the other car door. Also should be able to go through doors, thin walls and easily through those iron sheet lodges.

• 9mm: Should be able to penetrate at least one car door, those iron sheet lodges, thin wooden doors and still be able to do some damage.

I guess an ammo switch option would be too complex, regarding the many calibers Arma 3 offers.
So they probably should stick to the main purpose. And as far as I know they use the .50 cal sniper (instead of the smaller ones) mainly because of it's penetration power. Watched a documentation about it lately.

To the 5,56: That's true, but again I'd say they should stick to the most common ammo.

Here is a video of what I guess are standard FMJ 5,56mm rounds fired by a AR-15:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50_3Yyo0Nt0

I find the penetration power shown in this video still quite impressive. Easily goes through a 6mm steel plate and ballistic gel as thick as 2 human bodies.

Or that one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dGxRw8Jq70 (5,56mm NATO standard green tip round)

So I'm not satisfied that in Arma 3 the 5,56 won't even penetrate a car door and almost looses all it's power after penetrating one wall of that really thin rotten iron sheet lodge.

Some may think we are debating about nonrelevant details.
But these details are very important to create a realistic feeling and gameplay. And it has a huge impact on the way players play this game. When you know your gun has realistic penetration power (e.g. a machine gun), you don't run around houses trying to spot the enemy inside like in Counterstrike - you fill that building with lead from a distance like they would do it in real warfare situations.