ArmA3 Wishlist and Ideas

[dmarkwick 261]

I wanna request an awesome poster that comes with the purchase. I don't care if i have to pay 5-10 bucks more. Thanks

Even better, a large paper map.

[Daniel 0]

Even better, a large paper map.

Yeah! And make it look like it's just been washed up after a battle! :D

You know, damp, sandy, a bit crispy round the edges...

[AstroMan 10]

^ yes. Like the Reinforcement map, put like you describe it.

[Solarghost 10]

Even if it is not uber realistic, some functioning body armour to add realism and the need to use armour piercing ammunition in some cases, whereas standard ammo is more effective against those without armour.

Body armour is already a confirmed feature in the game

[KillerChimp 10]

I am really excited to see some underwater missions. This has always lacking in games. This adds a wole new area of dynamics to explore and I hope these missions will be expanded on in the future.

[rübe 127]

I am really excited to see some underwater missions. This has always lacking in games. This adds a wole new area of dynamics to explore and I hope these missions will be expanded on in the future.

IMHO first we should have AI that knows how to avoid water (ponds anyone?) and that actually knows how to use a damn bridge, or how to circumnavigate a lake or something.

But once we have that, I'm all for actually using the water.

Also I hope there's a lot of fish and sea anemone and stuff down there to look at. :)

[rye1 21]

^ AI have to learn one way or another... *gets out whip*

[On_Sabbatical 11]

i copy paste this excellent request from another member:

After the nice technical realism in A2, i strongly wish at least some taste of realsim in gameplay.

1: No Tab-lock, 2-lock and auto-lock(A2:Metis, Nlaw..) or at least the possiblity to turn it off.

2: No Radar or only for Aircraft/AA showing air contacts only (like real radar).

To explain why those changes are needed to make the gameplay realistic i will use examples from the Arma2 Warfare mode, which i play mostly and in which i know peoples gameplay behaviour. Of course other gamemodes would benefit too.

Let's begin with the most critical part - aircraft. When playing Warfare in a chopper with guided weapons, you press the tab-button all the time to lock on every enemy vehicle/aircraft in your range(up to 9km) and to instantly shoot a missile everytime you lock something. This way you can "clean" an area, which only depends on your locking range, from enemy vehicles completely. You do not need to see anything, just press tab-fire-tab-fire-tab... rearm fast and get back up. - The kill messages will rain on the screen.

The effects of this gameplay mechanic are huge.

1. The victims view: You get killed from a chopper which is 5km away and which you cannot even see, as well as it can'T see you. Could something be more frustrating? Now you have 3 possibilities:

#1:Stop using heavy weapons, move on as an infantry man

#2:Buy another tank and use the minute untill you get shot again (and show them your base position with this)

#3:Get an AA-vehicle, turn the engine off(to prevent getting locked, if you are already locked it doesn'T help) an press tab like an idiot yourself - the faster guy wins!

2. Hiding, stealtch operations - adapting to your environment - becomes impossible. You are in a tank and saw multiple enemy tanks using a street? You want to move in a valley or a think line of shrubbery so they can't see and shoot you? You want to try to get behind the enemy lines in a vehicle without beeing seen? Well, if you are good, noone will see you. But... BOOM. Welcome to Arma!

3. War games/sims like Arma give us this fun, because they are competitive (you maybe noticed a lot more males than females playing it ) You try to play well - and to define how well you play you need others. Tab-lock makes a players success independant from his skills/intelligence. This might be an explaination why tab-lock ruins the fun of MP players so much.

4. There is no need for pilots to develop skills. Some maneuvers might look cool or give you a small benefit - but you don't necessarily need them to be succesful - there are no "pros" like in other games.

Next part - Tank gameplay. To use a tank effectively in PVP frontline fighting, you basicly do the same like in a chopper - get in the driver seat, ai in the gunner seat and spam tab. One Abrams tank round is enough to destroy or disable every other ground vehicle. So the tank which shoots the first round will win! Since the gunner aims for you, you don't have anything to do than pressing tab, waiting for the cannon to stop moving and press fire. Players behaviour in Warfare can be called "blind". You can stand in the open field, 400m away from the enemy moving tank and point an AT launcher at him, he won't see you. All the information needed are given by the radar and the locking results. Players watch the radar while driving a tank, not the outside.

-> There is no realism in gameplay, the abitilities of all vehicles might be realsitic, the physics might be realistic(thats a different topic) but players do not behave like they would do if this would be real!!!

-> The atmosphere of war, the thrilling tension in the air caused by the fact that you can never know where the next enemy might be won't come up. There is no realism in gameplay!

Infantry - Autolock weapons like Metis. I don't think i have to write much about this now. No skill needed - shoot and forget - get on a hilltop with some more missiles in a truck and destroy every single enemy vehicle or static defence from 4km away! Rape 60% of the map just by yourself! The 30 guys in the enemy team can't do much in the next time! And yeah where do the new locks move to? where do they come from? GZ! you found their base! -.-

-> the disbalance of infantry / tanks. You use infantry to fuck up tanks, not other way round, like it should be.

You should NEVER be allowed to shoot something you cannot see/don't know about! You cannot act without information!

When i go through the threads in this forums i can see so many threads concerning problems which were created by tab-lock or are results of the 3rd or 4th part of a causal chain leading back to it! It is sad that such a great game like Arma gets destroyed by relatively little things like tab-lock or netcode problems! I don't see a third problem coming close to the importance of these two.

Thank you for reading, i really hope very much that this doesn't get spammed away from the devs minds!

[krazikilla 5]

hmmmm

Edited September 12, 2011 by KrAziKilla

[b00ce 160]

You do realize that just about every single radar guided missile is essentially tab-shoot, right? In real life engagement ranges for radar guided Air to Air missiles is measured in the tens of nautical miles.

This goes even for IR systems where they essentially home in on heat sources by them selves, though it works best if you can actually see the target. (In the case of the AIM-9) Usually there is no definitive "lock" it just growls at you louder when it has a better view and it can home in better. Implementing true passive IR seekers would greatly improve the implementation of flares and add realism.

There are even some A-G weapons that are essentially tab-shoot. The AGM-65 Maverick has an IR sensor in the nose that displays an image of a heat source on a tv camera, the pilot tells the missile to lock on to it and hits the fire button. The missile then guides itself to the target, fire and forget. Same goes for the AGM-114L, it is a radar guided missile tied to the Longbow radar dome on the Apache. The radar can detect, identify and prioritize 128 targets from greatest to least threat. The gunner or pilot basically tells the targeting computer "That one!" and pulls the trigger, the missile guides itself to the target from there. These ARE tab-shoot IRL. (And even more effective in some cases than in ArmA.)

That said, I do want to see missile systems that behave like they should, the Metis, NLAW, Dragon and TOW should all be optically guided by the player, same with laser guided systems like the AGM-114K.

The only weapons systems that should NOT be tab-shoot are optically tracked or laser guided.

Edit:

During Desert Storm 1, A-10 pilots would use the seekers on their mavericks to find targets at night, essentially spamming the tab key to find SCUD launchers or tanks.

Edited September 12, 2011 by b00ce

[instagoat 133]

You do realize that just about every single radar guided missile is essentially tab-shoot, right? In real life engagement ranges for radar guided Air to Air missiles is measured in the tens of nautical miles.

This goes even for IR systems where they essentially home in on heat sources by them selves, though it works best if you can actually see the target. (In the case of the AIM-9) Usually there is no definitive "lock" it just growls at you louder when it has a better view and it can home in better. Implementing true passive IR seekers would greatly improve the implementation of flares and add realism.

There are even some A-G weapons that are essentially tab-shoot. The AGM-65 Maverick has an IR sensor in the nose that displays an image of a heat source on a tv camera, the pilot tells the missile to lock on to it and hits the fire button. The missile then guides itself to the target, fire and forget. Same goes for the AGM-114L, it is a radar guided missile tied to the Longbow radar dome on the Apache. The radar can detect, identify and prioritize 128 targets from greatest to least threat. The gunner or pilot basically tells the targeting computer "That one!" and pulls the trigger, the missile guides itself to the target from there. These ARE tab-shoot IRL. (And even more effective in some cases than in ArmA.)

That said, I do want to see missile systems that behave like they should, the Metis, NLAW, Dragon and TOW should all be optically guided by the player, same with laser guided systems like the AGM-114K.

The only weapons systems that should NOT be tab-shoot are optically tracked or laser guided.

Edit:

During Desert Storm 1, A-10 pilots would use the seekers on their mavericks to find targets at night, essentially spamming the tab key to find SCUD launchers or tanks.

Good points there. The whole argument is about perceived "unfairness" more than "unrealism" in this case, I think. Modern combat is deadly, tanks out in the open will get sniped fast by enemy air power. The argument that "In real life you have to hit more switches" doesn´t count, because adding more controls only enables less players to do good in the game, because they have to fight the controls first. If you´re in a helo, you´re playing a trained individual who knows how to work the switches, so it´s realistic to assume that he can (even if the player can´t) work to detect and lock on targets very quickly.

The only thing that´s maybe a bit off balance is the speed and precision of the detection, as well as Identification. IFF would need to be implemented to make that more realistic: detected targets should be white by default, and manually be designated as "enemy" by the on-board AI (gunner) or the player himself. Don´t know how practicable that solution is though...

Cheerio

Insta

[On_Sabbatical 11]

so let's sk developpers for inlimited viewdistance and no warping.

[mrcash2009 0]

One minor thing Id like to see for CQB (and sorry if this is posted already)

Use of mouse wheel to open & close doors gradually either fast or slow like Raven Shield!

No more fumbling to show "open door" in action menu and then only having the option of completely open or completely closed.

Also ... BIS default sound config for door opening & closing :)

(If its a repeat and already in for A3 then I apologise).

[polecat.uk 11]

What i have in mind is a 2 stage roll first stage would be pressing Q or E once while prone would roll you onto your back and let you bring your weapon onto anyone sneaking up behind, the scope cant be used but you will be able to fire from the hip, stage 2 would be pressing Q or E twice would give you a full roll.

[EDcase 87]

These are more tweak wishes rather than new features request.

Could the post distance blur be reduced a bit or made an attribute in config? I love the idea but its just a bit too much at the moment.

Likewise the HDR effect is too agressive. Looking at the ground gets really bright but if a tiny bit of sky is visible it goes to the other extreme and goes really dark.

The sensitivity of brightness needs to be less. Or thinking in camera terms (which this simulates), the exposure metering should be more central to the view.

[J-Guid 10]

- WISH!!!

Remote controled vehicles with laser guidance, and turrets. looks like a SWAT robots, or RC toys!

[Maio 293]

- WISH!!!

Remote controled vehicles with laser guidance, and turrets. looks like a SWAT robots, or RC toys!

Already in-game :)

[purepassion 22]

take a look here ;)

:)

TALON's and similar are already on the "confirmed" list

Edited September 13, 2011 by PurePassion

[antrix 10]

I want the machines to can pull trailers or other machines if they are broken, or something like that. Because it would be really nice to make convoys with Trucks with trailers or howitzers.

[maddogx 13]

I want the machines to can pull trailers or other machines if they are broken, or something like that. Because it would be really nice to make convoys with Trucks with trailers or howitzers.

Towing has pretty much been confirmed in one of the texts on the new Arma3 website.

See here under "soft vehicles".

Some vehicles are sparse in the area of operation; if they break, tow them to a repair station.

[purepassion 22]

wouldn't the possibility of breaking your car in rough terrain stand for an extremely enhanced damage model? (simulated axis etc)

[mr.tuckty 10]

Transhumanism! Deus ex style :)

Edited September 13, 2011 by Mr.Tuckty

[wolfbite 8]

The ability to hide ground vehicles from aircraft radar eg with ground clutter or covers... If radar wasnt 360 for everything but a cone it would help too... sweep times for older radars would further help the situation... Being able to put AA/Artillery in batteries that co-operate with each other instead of just spamming a target... And an ability to give all vehicles different behavioural patterns...

Same goes for vehicles using I'r if something hasnt been turned on yet and is cold.. tab shouldnt just auto lock them.. Ir and radar should be blocked by obstacles..

ECM... for aircraft... ecm for trucks against IED's

Snipers/SF should try to be stealthier... Tanks shouldnt just drive into the middle of everything.. Bombers shouldnt be diving on everything... Hinds should do really fast passes ... Apache's should use pop up and hide... Medics should prioritize healing

Oh yeah smoke and I.R scramblers for various vehicles too..

Edited September 14, 2011 by wolfbite

[Just A Copy 0]

My personal wishes:

Gras:

in Arma 2, the AI doesn't really recognize gras.

My Solution: So... fix the AI or don't implement high gras like in Arma 2. Or both.

Trees:

Arma2: The AI doesn't recognize fallen trees and can see through them but the player can't see through them.

So my wish is don't let the AI see through fallen/dead trees. I

vehicle & tanks vs. trees and fences:

Arma2: Many vehicle vs object collisions aren't very comprehensible.

Like a m1a1 driving over a treetype 1 which has a small trunk and get's stopped but if it drives over a group of treetype 2 which has a bigger trunk it doesn't even get slowed down. And there is a treetype 3 which has a trunk like type 2 but has the same effect like type 1. :P

So my whish is ... make vehicle vs object collisions more comprehensible.

View inside a vehicle

Arma2: Some vehicles like the BTR-90 (i think) have no useable invehicle view, especially the driver's view.

No more of that please. Very disturbing if first person is forced.

Harriers:

Currently i have no clue if you include harriers again but if you do make it possible for the harrier to perform a vertical take-off like it should do.

I think you'll get my points ;)

[dm 9]

Harriers:

Currently i have no clue if you include harriers again but if you do make it possible for the harrier to perform a vertical take-off like it should do.

Harriers with a full war load (as depicted in A2) are not capable of vertical take off.

Edited September 14, 2011 by DM