General Discussion (dev branch)

[Tony_Larsen 10]

I think the real problem with that FIA side thing is that they are still stuck with a side based conflict - with all that "BLUFOR" and "OPFOR" nonsense - instead of having a factions based conflict with a direct and simple way to determine a faction's allies and enemies in the editor...

[Victim9l3 11]

I thought that was common knowledge: give all FIA groups an OPFOR leader with a probability of presence of 0 %. The OPFOR leader will never appear, but all groups are going to be OPFOR.

It's such common knowledge, that the guy you are quoting, "Doln" already said that in the quote you quoted from him. But Dolns only mistake was that he said it doesn't always work. Doln, it works 100% of the time. But that's ok. :)

Thank god we can do that though because bi changing the FIA to BLUFOR is another bad idea. If any faction should be Independent, FIA is the group. If anything make the AAF BLUFOR. Rebels can always fight anyone. They aren't always good, or bad. They exist because they want their own existence, so why would they take permenant sides.

Another reason it's a bad idea is because of the ridiculous super secret W.I.P. for 10 years 3D editor. You can't choose factions in that editor. So you have 3 or 4 Rifleman with no way of telling them apart until you spawn them. So they just added another way to slow down editing.

********Has anyone noticed that it took bi 2 days to replace the gunner in the FIA armed offroad from civilian to FIA, (I hope that includes the driver too), YET it's been over a month that the OPFOR SDV still has BLUFOR as the default crew. Does anyone have any good reason why they can't fix that? Someone is dropping the ball. We are talking about a simple change in notepad, replacing one name for another. But I guess making the fog pink is a higher priority.

Edited September 6, 2013 by Victim9l3

[Smurf 12]

********Has anyone noticed that it took bi 2 days to replace the gunner in the FIA armed offroad from civilian to FIA, (I hope that includes the driver too), YET it's been over a month that the OPFOR SDV still has BLUFOR as the default crew. Does anyone have any good reason why they can't fix that?

Because no one uses the SDV.

*runs to the hills*

[daze23 1]

By the way, what's with the "Return to Camp Maxwell" button at the "you are dead" screen ? Is that on purpose ?

it seems to function like the 'abort' option. not sure why it's called "camp maxwell" though

I don't know what to say about these last minute changes to the independent faction, other than it really doesn't make me feel confident about the state of this game

Edited September 6, 2013 by daze23

[Artyom 10]

By the way, what's with the "Return to Camp Maxwell" button at the "you are dead" screen ? Is that on purpose ?

There's unreadable text underneath that as well, I think it's just a bug.

[Victim9l3 11]

Because no one uses the SDV.

QUOTE]

I think you are right. That gave me a thought. It seems like that the more content they release, the more people are getting unhappy. Not so much at the game, it's with what we expected from bi. The product they are giving us seems a lower quality and with the hype at the beginning then finding most of that stuff not even make it into the game.

Is Arma3 just a way for them to finance a new engine? And are we going to be faced with an OA situation; Arma 3 getting hyped, with SDV's and submarines and vehicles that never made it to the release, Campaign scrapped, in fact seems like everything was scrapped. But we already paid. So Arma 3 is the smoke screen for the real game that will be released later. Also Arma 3 being a good test. Find out what we like and don't like so the real game will be great.

[fujix 11]

So Arma 3 is the smoke screen for the real game that will be released later. Also Arma 3 being a good test. Find out what we like and don't like so the real game will be great.

Wishful thinking my friend. Now this is pure speculation but Arma 3 is aimed towards the bigger masses. All the signs are there. Arma 3 was supposed to be a milestone but imo the whole project was/is a mess. It feels they dont really know what they want.

Again pure speculation they started with a proper sequel to Arma 2 and then half way through development they got a taste for money with dayZ (understandable) and proceeded with changing the game to attract people that normally would not play Arma.

[doln 10]

It seems tank driver AI (though I have only tested this with the T100) still does the arma 2 classic of random donuts and stopping for a smoke at seeminly random points on a road blocking up the whole convoy

I thought we had moved past this :(

[Smurf 12]

Is Arma3 just a way for them to finance a new engine?

Nope, A1 was that and partially A2.

This is just the beginning (and that is the key word here) of A3, so yeah, the real game is yet to come.

[doln 10]

The 0% opfor leader trick is not flawless - if I shoot at a FIA group as a blufor that I've done the opfor 0% trick too, every now and then my squadmates will think I'm shooting at a friendly and try to kill me for it. It is not an adequate replacement.

[daze23 1]

Script all that? No, thanks.

it's not too much. but now would be a great time for a simple loadout editor that includes uniforms

[froggyluv 2136]

The 0% opfor leader trick is not flawless - if I shoot at a FIA group as a blufor that I've done the opfor 0% trick too, every now and then my squadmates will think I'm shooting at a friendly and try to kill me for it. It is not an adequate replacement.

There used to be a 'Change Sides' module in the Alpha which worked really well for me but they've since removed it.

[doln 10]

There used to be a 'Change Sides' module in the Alpha which worked really well for me but they've since removed it.

Yeah along with the civilian sites module and the dynamic patrol and the colour grading module and a myriad of other modules that were very useful

Sucks man

Edit: Wasn't the whole point of changing direction and hence chucking a shitload of content to "create a game truly worthy of being called an arma sequel" to paraphrase Jay Crowe?

Edited September 6, 2013 by Doln

[ScratcH334 10]

There used to be a 'Change Sides' module in the Alpha which worked really well for me but they've since removed it.

Yeah, I really miss that one because it made such things way easier...

[ProfTournesol 956]

Up-vote here for independent FIA.

Done :)

[fujix 11]

Excuse my ignorance but this whole FIA to Blufor business, does it mean it will be a PITA/impossible to do for example Insurgency missions with FIA as the enemy? My understanding of mission creation is kinda limited.

[Varanon 892]

I Know, it's very easy to use BLUFOR Vehicles for OPFOR and so on. But that is'nt that what I mean.

If they have the coma pattern already In the screens, why we can't get them ingame ? :(

A lot of the vehicles have been shuffled around between the factions... the early videos had Hunter and Panther as OPFOR with the hex pattern

---------- Post added at 06:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:28 PM ----------

It's such common knowledge, that the guy you are quoting, "Doln" already said that in the quote you quoted from him. But Dolns only mistake was that he said it doesn't always work. Doln, it works 100% of the time. But that's ok. :)

Ugh, those new glasses still need calibration O.o

[Uncertain 10]

Excuse my ignorance but this whole FIA to Blufor business, does it mean it will be a PITA/impossible to do for example Insurgency missions with FIA as the enemy? My understanding of mission creation is kinda limited.

It certainly won't be impossible. I'm thinking that in the worst case, modding the editor to show the independent FIA would probably be doable. Or players could actually play as OPFOR for a change.

[pettka 694]

The change of FIA has some deeper meaning and I would like to remind you (general you, not specific you, just to be sure) that there are still all the classes for both Independent and OPFOR available. B_G_Soldier_F has his counterparts in O_G_Soldier_F and I_G_Soldier_F and so on. There are some specific reasons for them to be not displayed in editor, but that may be subject of change under some circumstances (do not count this as promise, please) :icon_twisted:

/// Edit: Added examples

[byku 13]

Pity though, it would be nice to have FIA both under NATO and Independent. Anyway, give me coaxial gun for T-100 and commanders gun for Merkava ;P and i'll be happy ;)

[KorroBravin 1]

Would be great if we could just set the factional alignment of individual units in the editor separate of what they might be listed under. (IE Put down an OPFOR marksman, but there is a drop down menu that can make him sided with Independent/BLUFOR) Might be useful/neat.

[mr burns 132]

Would be great if we could just set the factional alignment of individual units in the editor separate of what they might be listed under. (IE Put down an OPFOR marksman, but there is a drop down menu that can make him sided with Independent/BLUFOR) Might be useful/neat.

Been requested for ages, same as other simple yet powerful changes....

rly, how hard can it be

http://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/362928-lock-on-flaming-cliffs-windows-screenshot-mission-editors.jpg

[barakokula31 10]

Anyway, give me coaxial gun for T-100 and commanders gun for Merkava ;P and i'll be happy ;)

Agreed only for the coax for the T-100.

[insumsnoy 4]

Yeah along with the civilian sites module and the dynamic patrol and the colour grading module and a myriad of other modules that were very useful

Sucks man

Edit: Wasn't the whole point of changing direction and hence chucking a shitload of content to "create a game truly worthy of being called an arma sequel" to paraphrase Jay Crowe?

Dynamic Patrol is still there, listed under Sites.

[barakokula31 10]

Does anyone know what the Schorcher and Sochor are supposed to be based on? Or are they just imaginary vehicles?