General Discussion (dev branch)

[oldy41 61]

The main task of minigun - high density fire. You can increase the damage of 100, but will not increase the density of fire.

Yes. The damage dealt is absolutely not the point. Increasing the damage comes with some immersion breaking side effects, and it simply does not look good!

IMHO the A2 solution was absolutely sufficient. Personally I don't care whether there are really 2000, 4000 or nnn rounds per minute flying through the scene (and the engine). It simply should look and feel like many rpm, which the A2 solution achieved quite well.

And I can't believe that the A3 engine should not be capable to produce the same effect.

[bigpickle 0]

Yes. The damage dealt is absolutely not the point. Increasing the damage comes with some immersion breaking side effects, and it simply does not look good!

IMHO the A2 solution was absolutely sufficient. Personally I don't care whether there are really 2000, 4000 or nnn rounds per minute flying through the scene (and the engine). It simply should look and feel like many rpm, which the A2 solution achieved quite well.

And I can't believe that the A3 engine should not be capable to produce the same effect.

Agreed,

[[ha]boris 49]

The question is not only Minigun. Why so slow firing automatic guns, compared with their predecessors?

Why can not we give at-least CSAT Russian guns and machine guns, links to some I gave above? It would be logical. In this region, a lot of Russian weapons and military equipment.

This variety of possible equipment in the game, and then as if in 2035 the whole world buys weapons and military equipment from one Chinese factory, just different camouflage done.

[kuIoodporny 45]

Please note that 2A42 and 2A38 are far more inferior to weapons presented ingame.

2A42 is incapable of piercing even armour of wheeled APCs presented ingame at most situations. Using proposed weapons would be like trying to defeat BTR-60 with PKM.

2A38 fires a lot of ammo with low precision, and is less effective than 35mm with proper FCS. Also it cannot really be modeled ingame without either scripts or quite lot of programming work.

[bigpickle 0]

boris;2617493']The question is not only Minigun. Why so slow firing automatic guns' date=' compared with their predecessors? [/quote']

The fire rates are much higher in this game for most weapons than in arma2, that's the point that's been made here. The rates are so high that its causing massive fps drops, unlike arma 2 that uses slower rates but has multipliers and splash damage to simulate higher rates of fire.

---------- Post added at 19:10 ---------- Previous post was at 19:07 ----------

Please note that 2A42 and 2A38 are far more inferior to weapons presented ingame.

2A42 is incapable of piercing even armour of wheeled APCs presented ingame at most situations. Using proposed weapons would be like trying to defeat BTR-60 with PKM.

2A38 fires a lot of ammo with low precision, and is less effective than 35mm with proper FCS. Also it cannot really be modeled ingame without either scripts or quite lot of programming work.

Do you mean real life 2A42 is incapable of piercing even Armor of real life wheeled APCs? Sorry I don't understand what you mean, If you mean the real life values of an 2A42 wouldn't even scratch the defensive values of a wheeled apc from arma3, that leads me to ask why are the values so high for the vehicles?

Edited February 7, 2014 by Bigpickle

[Grumpy Old Man 3546]

Configured lights, position lights and collision lights of both planes and helicopters

does this finally resolve this issue?

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=15487

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

So I got an idea from the freezing cold weather in Texas. This is is more visual but could also affect gameplay.

It's to take the times of the year into mind. For instance, in Winter, the breathe of players would be seen (like in DayZ). Another thing would be snow/ice stuff falling if precipitation is set. Though I don't know that the weather on limnos is like, Texas is further south than Limnos and we rarely get snow (though were getting a bit Early Feb).

And for summer, you could become fatigued faster (but only a little faster). Maybe even incorporate hydration packs to help with fatigue?

Anyways, it's just an idea, but I do think something similar should be added to add difference with the seasons.

[kremator 1065]

Fog breath was done in Arma2.

[mamasan8 11]

I'm not sure whether my issue it the same as mentioned in this thread...

Basically I suffer an FPS drop for a second or two whenever I look down a scope or zoom in normally, please note this is before firing even.

Can anyone confirm whether this could be included as the same issue others are having here?

This has to do with graphics settings, I can't exactly remember which one but ATOC, MSAA or maybe FXAA. I would try turning ATOC Off first. See if it still happens.

And If I Recall Correctly, also Object draw distance.

Anyone spare me some memory? Mine has run out.

[NeMeSiS 11]

Fog breath was done in Arma2.

And snow in winter was in a default ArmA2 module which could occur during the right conditions. Too bad they removed it.

[John Kozak 14]

If you mean the real life values of an 2A42 wouldn't even scratch the defensive values of a wheeled apc from arma3, that leads me to ask why are the values so high for the vehicles?

35mm Oerlikon packs 2x kinetic energy of 2a42's projectile, plus it has 39 grams of explosive inside. If future APCs went to have armor resistant to 30x165mm, switch to 35mm is entirely justified.

EDIT: I forgot that most 2A42's ammunition types also have explosive payload. The point about kinetic energy still holds, though.

Edited February 8, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[Tonci87 163]

The solution to the ROF problems is not simply making them fire faster. The performance impact of a 2000-4000 RPM gun firing is quite big.

What BI have already done is adding splash damage to the mini-gun to compensate for the missing fired rounds, its not a perfect solution but it is pretty good.

For the AA a similar system cold be introduced.

The "solution" is absolutely horrible. You can wreck a house in two seconds with a littlebird. You can kill someone without actually hitting him, just by hitting the wall or ground near him. Nobody is going to use that thing in competitive MP because of that.

The "solution", it plain and simple sucks.

[oldy41 61]

The "solution" is absolutely horrible. You can wreck a house in two seconds with a littlebird. You can kill someone without actually hitting him, just by hitting the wall or ground near him. Nobody is going to use that thing in competitive MP because of that.

The "solution", it plain and simple sucks.

And, as I would like to stress :rolleyes:, it does not look and feel good.

So, why not employ the A2 approach?

[das attorney 858]

And, as I would like to stress :rolleyes:, it does not look and feel good.

So, why not employ the A2 approach?

Off the top of my head I would have thought the problem is as follows:

1 - A2 system uses damage multiplier

2 - With the new armour penetration system, the multiplied damage would pierce armour in excess of what the calibre is capable of.

That is just a guess/theory though. I might see if I can config the Littlebirds guns to work as they did in A2 and test it. I'm not sure if that's possible but I'll have a go and test the results.

[marcai 1]

• Added: New sounds to various animations
  

Do we have a list of which animations got new sounds to give them a test?

[RushHour 11]

You can kill someone without actually hitting him, just by hitting the wall or ground near him.

In theory you can kill someone with a gun even though you just missed. If i have a sniper rifle and miss your head by let´s say 20cm, your face will be teared of.

It´s not just the bullet itself that does damage.

[scrim 1]

In theory you can kill someone with a gun even though you just missed. If i have a sniper rifle and miss your head by let´s say 20cm, your face will be teared of.

It´s not just the bullet itself that does damage.

Bwahahahahahahaha!

Did I mention how ridiculously incorrect that is? Considering that there are several occasions of soldiers getting hit in the head by snipers and surviving, I think I can safely go ahead and call BS on that statement.

[twisted 128]

In theory you can kill someone with a gun even though you just missed. If i have a sniper rifle and miss your head by let´s say 20cm, your face will be teared of.

It´s not just the bullet itself that does damage.

lol. really.

[Primarch 10]

In theory you can kill someone with a gun even though you just missed. If i have a sniper rifle and miss your head by let´s say 20cm, your face will be teared of.

It´s not just the bullet itself that does damage.

This is wrong. Did you learn anything about physics and biology in school?

[MadocComadrin 12]

It depends on the type of the round used. A 50-cal, for example, can do damage with near hits.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

It depends on the type of the round used. A 50-cal, for example, can do damage with near hits.

This.

[RushHour 11]

This is wrong. Did you learn anything about physics and biology in school?

I think you missed physics class and biology, listen to MadocComadrin.

[scrim 1]

It depends on the type of the round used. A 50-cal, for example, can do damage with near hits.

Yeah, a .50 round fragmenting close to you can lead to minor shrapnel wounds. Not kill someone by "ripping their face off".

[RushHour 11]

Yeah, a .50 round fragmenting close to you can lead to minor shrapnel wounds. Not kill someone by "ripping their face off".

Nope, no fragmentation needed. You are focusing on the bullet rather then what´s right behind it.

Let´s assume you have a velocity of a thousand meters per second. That´s a pressure pattern/schockwave passing by 10cm from your face at approximately three times the speed of sound.

If you think your face is fully intact after that i don´t know what to say.

On top of that it´s not exactly "room temperature" behind the bullet.

Edited February 9, 2014 by RushHour

[-Coulum- 35]

Let´s assume you have a velocity of a thousand meters per second. That´s a pressure pattern/schockwave passing by 10cm from your face at approximately three times the speed of sound.

If you think your face is fully intact after that i don´t know what to say.

On top of that it´s not exactly "room temperature" behind the bullet.

Hmm. I think this is another one of those .50 cal myths. I am sure the small wave that the bullet creates will not feel pleasant if you are hit with it, but I seriously doubt it would "rip your face off" or even break skin. Or mealt it for that matter. And to get hit with that wave with full "supersonic strength" you would need to be millimetres away. I can only imagine it would dissipate quite rapidly after that. I am by no means an expert but I do not believe that a near miss can kill someone. Certainly not a miss of 20cm.

Best I have to back that up is mythbusters did a test and a 50 cal. was unable to damage thin glass cups with near misses. If it can't break a glass I doubt it would break your face.

12.7 are still relatively small, light objects. They don't have magical abilities.